Key result
Higher CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores independently predicted an increased risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with interatrial block without atrial fibrillation, with a CHADS2 hazard ratio of 1.442.
Why the study?
Do CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores predict the risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with interatrial block without atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=1,046)
No
Do CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores predict the risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with interatrial block without atrial fibrillation?
Hazard Ratio: 1.442 (95% CI 1.171–1.774)
p-value: p=0.001
CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores can predict the risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with interatrial block who do not have atrial fibrillation.
May inform stroke risk assessment in interatrial block without AF; extends CHA2DS2-VASc validation but remains hypothesis-generating.
AIM: -VASc scores in predicting the risk of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) outcomes in patients with interatrial block (IAB) without a history of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: -VASc scores were retrospectively calculated. The primary outcomes evaluated were ischemic stroke or TIA. RESULTS: -VASc (HR, 1.420; 95% CI, 1.203-1.677; P＜0.001) scores were independently associated with ischemic stroke or TIA following adjustment for smoking, left atrial diameter, antiplatelet agents, angiotensin inhibitors, and statins. CONCLUSIONS: -VASc scores may be predictors of risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with IAB without AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Interatrial block without atrial fibrillation (n=1,046). CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores vs. Lower risk scores was evaluated on Ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.442, 95% CI 1.171-1.774, p=0.001). Higher CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores independently predicted an increased risk of ischemic stroke or TIA in patients with interatrial block without atrial fibrillation, with a CHADS2 hazard ratio of 1.442.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: