4.3 Article

Usefulness of the ACTEL Score to Predict Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Cryptogenic Stroke

期刊

CARDIOLOGY
卷 145, 期 3, 页码 168-177

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000505262

关键词

Atrial fibrillation; Cryptogenic stroke; Echocardiogram; Score

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: To assess the probability of undetected atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with ischemic stroke, we previously compared patients who were first diagnosed with AF with patients with large or small artery disease and obtained the MrWALLETS 8-item scoring system. In the present study, we utilized cryptogenic strokes (CS) as the control group, as AF is normally sought among CS patients. Methods: We retrospectively examined 191 ischemic stroke patients (72.5 +/- 12.6 years), 68 with first diagnosed AF and 123 with CS, who had undergone 2 brain CT scans, echocardiography, carotid/vertebral ultrasound, continuous electrocardiogram monitoring and anamnestic/laboratory search for cardiovascular risk factors. Results: In logistic regression, 5 variables were independently associated with AF, forming the ACTEL score: Age >= 75 years (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.18-4.96, p = 0.02; +1 point); hyperCholesterolemia (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.78, p = 0.009; -1 point); Tricuspid regurgitation >= mild-to-moderate (OR 4.99, 95% CI 1.63-15.27, p = 0.005; +1 point); left ventricular End-diastolic volume <65 mL (OR 7.43, 95% CI 2.44-22.6, p = 0.0004; +1 point); Left atrium >= 4 cm (OR 4.57, 95% CI 1.97-10.62, p = 0.0004; +1 point). The algebraic sum of these points may range from -1 to +4. For AF identification, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.80 (95% CI 0.73-0.87). With a cutoff of >= 2, positive predictive value was 80.8%, specificity 92.7% and sensitivity 55.9%. Conclusions: The ACTEL score, a simplified and improved version of the MrWALLETS score, allows the identification of patients with first diagnosed AF, in the context of CSs, with a high positive predictive value.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据