4.5 Article

High level of D-dimer predicts ischemic stroke in patients with infective endocarditis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Volume 34, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcla.23206

Keywords

D-dimer; infective endocarditis; ischemic stroke

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Ischemic stroke is one of the most prominent and serious neurological complications of infective endocarditis (IE). Our study was designed to evaluate the predictive value of higher level of plasma D-dimer on admission for the development of ischemic stroke in patients with IE. Methods In this prospective study, a total of 173 consecutive patients with IE were recruited from January 2016 to December 2018. Plasma D-dimer and other clinical indexes of IE patients were measured after admission. The number of patients who developed ischemic stroke during 6-month follow-up was recorded, as well as the occurrence time of ischemic stroke. Results Ischemic stroke was observed in 38 (22%) patients during 6-month follow-up since definite diagnosis of IE. Patients with ischemic stroke had significantly higher levels of plasma D-dimer than those of patients without stroke (4982 vs 2205 mu g/L, P < .001). In addition, Staphylococcus aureus infection (HR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.51-2.42), mitral valve vegetation (HR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.32-1.75), and higher levels of on-admission plasma D-dimer (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.27-1.43) were significantly associated with ischemic stroke. Moreover, D-dimer levels >= 3393 mu g/L served as a strong predictor for ischemic stroke in patients with IE, and the sensitivity and specificity were 78% and 83%, respectively. Conclusion Our study suggested that higher level of D-dimer on admission was an independent predictor for ischemic stroke in patients with IE. These patients may require special attention, in particular within the first trimester after IE diagnosis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available