4.4 Article

Stroke and antiphospholipid syndrome-antiphospholipid antibodies are a risk factor for an ischemic cerebrovascular event

Journal

CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 379-384

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-018-4247-3

Keywords

Antiphospholipid antibody; Risk; Stroke; Treatment

Categories

Funding

  1. Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS) [P3-0314]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Testing for antiphospholipid antibodies could be an important part in determining the cause of a cerebrovascular event (CVE). Currently, it is also unknown whether antiphospholipid antibodies represent a risk factor for the development of a CVE and whether the selected therapy options are efficacious. So, this study aimed at (1) determining the frequency of patients experiencing a CVE and fulfilling the laboratory criterion for an antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), (2) investigating whether the persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies represented a risk factor for a CVE, and (3) focusing on the efficacy of the selected treatment strategy in the first year after the CVE. Eighty-nine patients with an acute CVE were prospectively followed for 1 year. At least two sera from each were tested for lupus anticoagulants, anticardiolipin, anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I, anti-phosphatidylserine/prothrombin and anti-annexin Vantibodies. Twenty out of eighty-nine (22%) of CVE patients fulfilled the criteria for APS (17/20 for definitive and 3 for probable APS). There was a significant association between persistently present antiphospholipid antibodies and the CVE (OR, 4.62). No statistically significant difference was found in the CVE recurrence rate between APS-CVE and non-APS-CVE patients being treated mainly with acetyl salicylic acid. Antiphospholipid antibodies represent an independent risk factor for a CVE. In the first year after the CVE, antiplatelet therapy seemed to be sufficient in secondary CVE thromboprophylaxis in most APS patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available