C-Reactive Protein Levels and Clinical Prognosis in LAA-Type Stroke Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study
Table 2
Plasma C-reactive protein levels and functional outcomes during follow-up.
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Events%
OR
95% CI
OR
95% CI
OR
95% CI
Outcome 1 (3-month follow-up)
Group A
33.33%
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Group B
44.78%
1.559
0.762-3.192
0.224
1.548
0.752-3.187
0.236
1.400
0.673-2.915
0.368
Group C
56.72%
2.545
1.241-5.221
0.011
2.611
1.241-5.496
0.011
2.574
1.213-5.463
0.014
0.038
0.040
0.044
Outcome 2 (6-month follow-up)
Group A
30.30%
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Group B
41.79%
1.572
0.754-3.276
0.228
1.553
0.741-3.253
0.243
1.384
0.651-2.940
0.399
Group C
55.22%
2.756
1.324-5.734
0.007
2.751
1.290-5.865
0.009
2.806
1.298-6.065
0.009
<0.001
0.031
0.026
Outcome 3 (12-month follow-up)
Group A
33.33%%
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Ref
Group B
40.30%%
1.299
0.632-2.669
0.476
1.267
0.611-2.626
0.524
1.093
0.519-2.303
0.815
Group C
56.72%%
2.57
1.253-5.269
0.010
2.446
1.165-5.135
0.018
2.492
1.167-5.321
0.018
0.027
0.047
0.033
Note: in the logistic regression analysis, Model 1 adjusted for gender and age. Model 2 incorporates gender, age, smoking history, drinking history, history of dyslipidemia, and history of diabetes as confounding factors, and Model 3 incorporates lipid levels and blood glucose levels on the basis of Model 2. We can see that after adjusting for various confounding factors, CRP still significantly affects the prognosis of patients.
