What is the strength of current evidence and what are the research priorities for secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and recent cerebrovascular events?
This WSO scientific statement highlights critical knowledge gaps and research priorities for secondary stroke prevention in patients with AF and recent cerebrovascular events.
BACKGROUND: Secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the fastest growing areas in the field of cerebrovascular diseases. This scientific statement from the World Stroke Organization Brain & Heart Task Force provides a critical analysis of the strength of current evidence on this topic, highlights areas of current controversy, identifies knowledge gaps, and proposes priorities for future research. METHODS: We select topics with the highest clinical relevance and perform a systematic search to answer specific practical questions. Based on the strength of available evidence and knowledge gaps, we identify topics that need to be prioritized in future research. For this purpose, we adopt a novel classification of evidence strength based on the availability of publications in which the primary population is patients with recent (<6 months) cerebrovascular events, the primary study endpoint is a recurrent ischemic stroke, and the quality of the studies (e.g. observational versus randomized controlled trial). SUMMARY: Priority areas include AF screening, molecular biomarkers, AF subtype classification, anticoagulation in device-detected AF, timing of anticoagulation initiation, effective management of breakthrough strokes on existing anticoagulant therapy, the role of left atrial appendage closure, novel approaches, and antithrombotic therapy post-intracranial hemorrhage. Strength of currently available evidence varies across the selected topics, with early anticoagulation being the one showing more consistent data. CONCLUSION: Several knowledge gaps persist in most areas related to secondary stroke prevention in AF. Prioritizing research in this field is crucial to advance current knowledge and improve clinical care.
Sposato et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: