SynthesisInternational journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society2026
Does illicit drug use increase stroke risk? A systematic review, meta-analyses, and Mendelian randomization analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidemiological evidence suggests associations between substance use disorders and risk of stroke, but whether these are due to confounding or are true causal relationships remains uncertain.
aimsTo meta-analyze the observational evidence on illicit substance use and stroke risk and apply Mendelian randomization (MR) to evaluate potential causal effects of substance dependence on stroke subtypes.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting associations between illicit drug use and stroke (PROSPERO registration-CRD420251053702). The meta-analysis included 32 studies comprising more than 100 million total participants across administrative, hospital-based, and population-based datasets. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using multivariate random-effects models for ischemic and hemorrhagic subtypes. We then performed two-sample MR using genome-wide association study summary statistics to examine associations between seven drug exposures and all stroke, ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, and ischemic stroke subtypes.
resultsMeta-analysis demonstrated significant associations of cannabis (OR = 1.37, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.14-1.65), cocaine (OR = 1.96; 95% CI = 1.27-3.01), and amphetamines (OR = 2.22, 95% CI = 1.40-3.53) with increased stroke risk, while no significant association was observed for opioids. Findings for cannabis showed some heterogeneity and small-study effects. MR analyses revealed that cannabis use disorder was associated with any stroke (OR = 1.11 [1.01-1.51]) and large artery stroke (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.01-1.80), and cocaine dependence was associated with cardioembolic stroke (OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.02-1.14) and intracerebral hemorrhage (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.15-1.65). Genetically predicted substance use disorder overall was associated with any stroke (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.02-1.72) and intracerebral hemorrhage (OR = 7.79, 95% CI = 3.46-17.54). Problematic and dependent alcohol use was linked to large artery and cardioembolic stroke, whereas nicotine dependence showed no significant associations.
conclusionOur findings provide consistent observational and genetic evidence that several forms of substance misuse increase stroke risk, particularly cocaine, amphetamines, and cannabis. These findings suggest important public health implications for prevention strategies targeting substance use disorders to mitigate stroke risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.