4.2 Article

A Simple Score That Predicts Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation on Outpatient Cardiac Monitoring after Embolic Stroke of Unknown Source

期刊

JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
卷 27, 期 6, 页码 1692-1696

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.01.028

关键词

Atrial fibrillation; ischemic stroke; ESUS; cardioembolic stroke; cardiac monitoring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Occult paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) is detected in 16%-30% of patients with embolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS). The identification of AF predictors on outpatient cardiac monitoring can help guide clinicians decide on a duration or method of cardiac monitoring after ESUS. Methods: We included all patients with ESUS who underwent an inpatient diagnostic evaluation and outpatient cardiac monitoring between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on detection of AF or atrial flutter during monitoring. We compared demographic data, clinical risk factors, and cardiac biomarkers between the 2 groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine predictors of AF. Results: We identified 296 consecutive patients during the study period; 38 (12.8%) patients had AF detected on outpatient cardiac monitoring. In a multivariable regression analysis, advanced age (ages 65-74: odds ratio [OR] 2.36, 95% confidence interval [CI].85-6.52; ages 75 or older: OR 4.08, 95% CI 1.58-10.52) and moderate-to-severe left atrial enlargement (OR 4.66, 95% CI 1.7912.12) were predictors of AF on outpatient monitoring. We developed the Brown ESUS-AF score: age (65-74 years: 1 point, 75 years or older: 2 points) and left atrial enlargement (moderate or severe: 2 points) with good prediction of AF (area under the curve.725) and was internally validated using bootstrapping. The percentage of patients with AF detected in each score category were as follows: 0: 4.2%; 1: 14.8%; 2: 20.8%; 3: 22.2%; 4: 55.6%. Conclusions: The Brown ESUS-AF score predicts AF on prolonged outpatient monitoring after ESUS. More studies are needed to externally validate our findings.

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

4.2
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