4.7 Article

Ischemic stroke in young adults: classification and risk factors

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 259, Issue 4, Pages 653-659

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-011-6234-3

Keywords

Brain ischemia; Stroke in young; Risk factors; ASCO; TOAST

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our aim was to analyze an important subgroup represented by young adult patients (19-45 years) with acute ischemic stroke according to stroke classification (including the novel ASCO score), infarct types and risk factors. All patients up to 45 years of age with an acute ischemic stroke confirmed by MRI and treated in our stroke unit from 2006 to 2009 were recruited for this study. Patients were neurologically examined and underwent thorough stroke work-up. One hundred four patients (58 women, 46 men) with a mean age of 38 +/- 6.9 years were evaluated. The mean NIHSS score (+/- SD) was 3 +/- 5 on admission and 1 +/- 4 on discharge. The classification using TOAST/ASCO (grade 1) was as follows: Macroangiopathic 10.6%/8.7%, cardiac origin 21.2%/10.6%, microangiopathic 9.6%/9.6%, other causes 19.2%/13.5% and undetermined 39.4%/19.2% (for A0S0C0O0). The most common risk factors were smoking (55.2%), hypertension (31.4%) and hyperlipidemia (27.6%). Twenty nine of 74 patients with TEE (39.2%) had a patent foramen ovale (PFO). Hypoplastic posterior circulation (21.9%) and migraine (21.0%) were also quite common. Young adult ischemic stroke patients share many of the characteristic risk factors with the general elderly ischemic stroke population. If regular work-up includes TEE, a high percentage of young patients reveal comorbidities with PFO, hypoplasia of the posterior circulation and migraine. The ASCO classification should be favored for a better classification of coexisting stroke subtypes and lower number of undetermined etiologies in this patient group.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available