From the Division of Cardiology (S.K.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Cardiovascular Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (S.K., L.W., W.G., P.T.E., S.A.L.).
Stroke. 2020 May;51(5):1396-1403. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.028837. Epub 2020 Apr 7.
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 CHADS-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 (CHADS-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 CHADS-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.
背景与目的- 在病因学中将中风归类为心源性栓塞可能具有挑战性,特别是因为主要病因心房颤动(AF)可能不在中风发生时出现。能够区分心源性栓塞性卒中和非心源性栓塞性卒中的有效工具可能会改善治疗效果,因为心源性栓塞后通常需要抗凝治疗。我们旨在评估和量化 AF 风险作为急性缺血性脑卒中患者真实世界人群中心源性栓塞的分类器的鉴别能力。方法- 我们对急性缺血性脑卒中的多机构样本进行了横断面分析。我们系统地裁定了中风亚型,并使用 CHADS-VASc、基因组流行病学中的心脏和衰老队列-AF 评分以及最近开发的基于电子健康记录的 AF 评分,研究了 AF 风险与心源性栓塞性中风之间的关联,采用逻辑回归进行分析。我们通过计算 C 统计量和心源性栓塞性中风的灵敏度/特异性截止值来比较 AF 风险区分心源性栓塞的能力。结果- 在 1431 名缺血性脑卒中患者(年龄 65±15 岁;40%为女性)中,有 323 名(22.6%)患有心源性栓塞。AF 风险与心源性栓塞显著相关(CHADS-VASc:每标准差的优势比[OR],1.69[95%置信区间,1.49-1.93];基因组流行病学中的心脏和衰老队列-AF 评分:OR,2.22[95%置信区间,1.90-2.60];基于电子健康记录的 AF:OR,2.55[95%置信区间,2.16-3.04])。基因组流行病学中的心脏和衰老队列-AF 评分(C 指数,0.695[95%置信区间,0.663-0.726])和基于电子健康记录的 AF 评分(C 指数,0.713[95%置信区间,0.681-0.744])的鉴别能力大于 CHADS-VASc(C 指数,0.651[95%置信区间,0.619-0.683])。在一系列阈值下检查 AF 评分表明,AF 风险可能有助于识别心源性栓塞可能性较低的个体(例如,基于电子健康记录的 AF 评分的阴性似然比在灵敏度阈值为 0.90-0.99 时为 0.31-0.10)。结论- AF 风险评分与心源性栓塞性中风相关,具有中等的鉴别能力。在中风发生时使用 AF 风险评分可能最有助于识别心源性栓塞可能性较低的个体。需要进一步分析以评估中风亚型分类是否可以提高未分化中风的治疗效果。