Key result
Atrial fibrillation risk scores, notably the Electronic Health Record-Based AF score, were significantly associated with cardioembolic stroke (OR per SD 2.55; 95% CI 2.16-3.04).
Why the study?
Classifying stroke as cardioembolic is challenging because atrial fibrillation may not be present at stroke onset, and efficient discriminative tools could improve care.
Do atrial fibrillation risk scores discriminate cardioembolic from noncardioembolic stroke in patients with acute ischemic stroke?
Cross-Sectional (n=1,431)
Yes
Do atrial fibrillation risk scores discriminate cardioembolic from noncardioembolic stroke in patients with acute ischemic stroke?
Atrial fibrillation risk scores, particularly the EHR-Based AF score and CHARGE-AF score, exhibit moderate discrimination for cardioembolic stroke and may help identify patients at low probability of cardioembolism.
May inform cardioembolic stroke etiology assessment; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
Background and Purpose— Classification of stroke as cardioembolic in etiology can be challenging, particularly since the predominant cause, atrial fibrillation (AF), may not be present at the time of stroke. Efficient tools that discriminate cardioembolic from noncardioembolic strokes may improve care as anticoagulation is frequently indicated after cardioembolism. We sought to assess and quantify the discriminative power of AF risk as a classifier for cardioembolism in a real-world population of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods— We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a multi-institutional sample of patients with acute ischemic stroke. We systematically adjudicated stroke subtype and examined associations between AF risk using CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc, Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score, and the recently developed Electronic Health Record–Based AF score, and cardioembolic stroke using logistic regression. We compared the ability of AF risk to discriminate cardioembolism by calculating C statistics and sensitivity/specificity cutoffs for cardioembolic stroke. Results— Of 1431 individuals with ischemic stroke (age, 65±15; 40% women), 323 (22.6%) had cardioembolism. AF risk was significantly associated with cardioembolism (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc: odds ratio [OR] per SD, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.49–1.93]; Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score: OR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.90–2.60]; electronic Health Record–Based AF: OR, 2.55 [95% CI, 2.16–3.04]). Discrimination was greater for Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-AF score (C index, 0.695 [95% CI, 0.663–0.726]) and Electronic Health Record–Based AF score (0.713 [95% CI, 0.681–0.744]) versus CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (C index, 0.651 [95% CI, 0.619–0.683]). Examination of AF scores across a range of thresholds indicated that AF risk may facilitate identification of individuals at low likelihood of cardioembolism (eg, negative likelihood ratios for Electronic Health Record–Based AF score ranged 0.31–0.10 at sensitivity thresholds 0.90–0.99). Conclusions— AF risk scores associate with cardioembolic stroke and exhibit moderate discrimination. Utilization of AF risk scores at the time of stroke may be most useful for identifying individuals at low probability of cardioembolism. Future analyses are warranted to assess whether stroke subtype classification can be enhanced to improve outcomes in undifferentiated stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khurshid et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional in Acute ischemic stroke (n=1,431). Atrial fibrillation risk scores (CHA2DS2-VASc, CHARGE-AF, EHR-Based AF) was evaluated on Cardioembolic stroke (OR 2.55, 95% CI 2.16-3.04). Atrial fibrillation risk scores, notably the Electronic Health Record-Based AF score, were significantly associated with cardioembolic stroke (OR per SD 2.55; 95% CI 2.16-3.04).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: