March 9, 2016Open Access
View Full PaperHeart Rhythm Monitoring Strategies for Cryptogenic Stroke: 2015 Diagnostics and Monitoring Stroke Focus Group Report
Key Result
Extended cardiac monitoring for atrial fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic stroke was reviewed by a focus group to identify knowledge gaps and discuss future study designs.
Structured PICO
P
Population
Patients with cryptogenic strokes (CS; also called embolic strokes of undetermined source)
I
Intervention
Extended cardiac monitoring for atrial fibrillation
This focus group report highlights the clinical challenge of cryptogenic stroke and the potential utility of extended cardiac monitoring to detect atrial fibrillation and guide oral anticoagulation therapy.
Abstract
Stroke is a major public health issue worldwide. The prevalence of stroke in 2010 was 33 million, with 16.9 million people having a first stroke.1 Stroke was the second‐leading cause of death behind heart disease globally, accounting for over 10% of total deaths worldwide. Stroke is a heterogeneous condition that can be due to rupture of a blood vessel (hemorrhagic) or to blockage of a vessel (ischemic). About 85% of strokes are ischemic in origin and these are often classified by mechanism. This should be distinguished from risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, smoking, etc. Risk factors increase the risk of stroke but do not necessarily explain the mechanism of a particular stroke. About 25% of ischemic strokes have a radiographic appearance similar to that seen in patients with cardioembolic sources (such as atrial fibrillation AF, prosthetic valves, valvular prolapse, or mitral valve regurgitation), but no embolic source is found. These "cryptogenic strokes" (CS; also called embolic strokes of undetermined source) pose a particular clinical challenge in that the optimal antithrombotic therapy to reduce recurrence is uncertain. Since there are currently no data to support long‐term oral anticoagulation (OAC) in CS, but also no specific trials that have addressed this question, guidelines recommend antiplatelet therapy. Identification of AF in these patients changes the most likely mechanism to cardioembolism, and thus changes the recommended antithrombotic therapy to OAC, which is extremely effective in preventing stroke in patients with AF. This report is based on discussions held at The Diagnostics and Monitoring Stroke Focus Group, a meeting held on January 15 to 17, 2015. The meeting focused on CS as a healthcare issue, and the utility of extended cardiac monitoring for AF in patients with strokes of unknown origin. The objectives of the meeting were to review existing information on the subject, define areas where knowledge was lacking or limited, and discuss study designs by which information gaps might be filled.