Why the study?
Identifying age-related interactions between microembolism risk factors can improve understanding of the mechanisms underlying ischemic stroke development.
The biophysical power of microembolic signals increases with age in patients recovering from ischemic stroke, particularly in those with atrial fibrillation, suggesting age-related differences in microembolism mechanisms.
Age-related rise in microembolic signal power, especially in AF, is hypothesis-generating; leaves open age-specific embolism mechanisms and monitoring needs post-stroke.
Identification of the age-related features of interaction between the risk factors of microembolism can improve understanding of the mechanisms underlying the development of ischemic stroke (IS). The study was aimed to assess the effects of age and other risk factors of stroke on the biophysical characteristics of microembolic signals (MES) recorded during the ischemic stroke recovery period. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) involving microembolus detection (MED) was performed in 515 people, the data of 28 patients having a history of ischemic stroke, among them 9 women (32%) and 19 men (68%) aged 33–78 (average age 58 ± 13 years), were included in the study. Using the mixed-effects linear model it was found that age and interaction between age and atrial fibrillation affected the power of MES. The increase in the power of the recorded MES with age is observed, that is especially evident in patients with atrial fibrillation (р < 0.0005). As for cardioembolic IS variant, the power and duration of MES turn out to be significantly higher in elderly patients (p < 0.0005). The power of MES gradually increases with age in patients with no atherosclerosis and gradually decreases in patients with atherosclerosis, while MES power in patients with atherosclerosis in general (all age groups) is significantly higher (р < 0.0005) than that observed in patients with no atherosclerosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Orlova et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: