Frontiers in neurology · 2026
Association between complete blood count-derived hematological inflammatory ratios and nutritional risk in elderly patients with acute ischemic stroke.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xu Liang'e, Wu Wenjing, Chen Chao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Mounting evidence suggests CBC-derived hematological inflammatory ratios correlate with nutritional status, yet few studies explore their cross-sectional associations with GNRI-defined concurrent nutritional risk in elderly patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This single-center, cross-sectional, observational study was designed to evaluate the correlation between routine admission hematological markers and nutritional risk in elderly patients with AIS. Twelve CBC-derived indices were analyzed: lymphocyte ratio (LR), red blood cell-to-lymphocyte ratio (RLR), hemoglobin-to-lymphocyte ratio (HLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), monocyte-to-neutrophil ratio (MNR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), NLR-to-platelet ratio (NLR/PLT100), MLR-to-platelet ratio (MLR/PLT), platelet-to-neutrophil ratio (PNR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), mean platelet volume-to-lymphocyte ratio (MPVLR), serum albumin-to-lymphocyte ratio (ALBLR).
METHODS: Between January 2022 and January 2024, 540 elderly AIS patients (≥60 years) were enrolled. All participants underwent admission GNRI assessment and were split into GNRI-defined nutritional risk group (GNRI≤98, n = 245, 45.4%) and non-nutritional risk group (GNRI>98, n = 295). Venous blood was collected within 24 h on admission. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were applied to explore cross-sectional correlations, and an exploratory combined statistical model was built. ROC curve, DeLong's test, likelihood ratio test and AIC were used to evaluate model discrimination and fit.
RESULTS: Multiple indicators including age, hypertension, ALT, UA, TG, LR, RLR, MLR, NLR, NLR/PLT100, MLR/PLT, PLR and MPVLR showed univariate correlations with nutritional risk. Multivariate regression identified MLR and NLR/PLT100 as independent correlates within this cohort; MLR showed the strongest association in this dataset instead of robust correlative ability. Adding MLR alone or combining MLR + NLR/PLT100 to base clinical variables significantly improved C-statistic. The combined model reached an AUC of 0.735, representing only moderate discriminative capacity, and it was merely the superior exploratory model limited to the present sample without external generalizability.
CONCLUSION: Within this single-center cohort, MLR exhibited the strongest cross-sectional correlation with GNRI-defined nutritional risk among all tested CBC-derived hematological inflammatory ratios. The composite model combining baseline clinical indicators, MLR and NLR/PLT*100 demonstrated moderate discriminative ability within the study sample, but is not yet robust enough to serve as an effective tool for routine clinical risk stratification.
METHODS: Between January 2022 and January 2024, 540 elderly AIS patients (≥60 years) were enrolled. All participants underwent admission GNRI assessment and were split into GNRI-defined nutritional risk group (GNRI≤98, n = 245, 45.4%) and non-nutritional risk group (GNRI>98, n = 295). Venous blood was collected within 24 h on admission. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were applied to explore cross-sectional correlations, and an exploratory combined statistical model was built. ROC curve, DeLong's test, likelihood ratio test and AIC were used to evaluate model discrimination and fit.
RESULTS: Multiple indicators including age, hypertension, ALT, UA, TG, LR, RLR, MLR, NLR, NLR/PLT100, MLR/PLT, PLR and MPVLR showed univariate correlations with nutritional risk. Multivariate regression identified MLR and NLR/PLT100 as independent correlates within this cohort; MLR showed the strongest association in this dataset instead of robust correlative ability. Adding MLR alone or combining MLR + NLR/PLT100 to base clinical variables significantly improved C-statistic. The combined model reached an AUC of 0.735, representing only moderate discriminative capacity, and it was merely the superior exploratory model limited to the present sample without external generalizability.
CONCLUSION: Within this single-center cohort, MLR exhibited the strongest cross-sectional correlation with GNRI-defined nutritional risk among all tested CBC-derived hematological inflammatory ratios. The composite model combining baseline clinical indicators, MLR and NLR/PLT*100 demonstrated moderate discriminative ability within the study sample, but is not yet robust enough to serve as an effective tool for routine clinical risk stratification.