BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of atrial fibrillation patients with a congestive heart failure (C), hypertension (H), age ≥ 75 (A), diabetes (D), stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (S2) (CHADS2) score of <2 remains imprecise, particularly in women. Our objectives were to validate the CHADS2 and congestive heart failure (C), hypertension (H), age ≥ 75 (A2), diabetes (D), stroke, TIA or prior thromboembolic disease (S2)- vascular disease (V), age 65-74 (A), female gender (S) (CHA2DS2-VASc) stroke risk scores in a healthy cohort of American women with atrial fibrillation and to determine whether CHA2DS2-VASc further risk-stratifies individuals with a CHADS2 score of <2. METHODS: We identified a cohort of 5981 women with atrial fibrillation not on warfarin at baseline (mean age 65.9 ± 7.2 years) enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative and followed for a median of 11.8 years. Univariate and multivariate proportional hazards analyses were used to examine these 2 risk scores, with main outcome measures being annualized event rates of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack stratified by risk score. RESULTS: Annualized stroke/transient ischemic attack rates ranged from 0.36% to 2.43% with increasing CHADS2 score (0-4+) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-1.71 for each 1-point increase) and 0.20%-2.02% with increasing CHA2DS2-VASc score (1-6+) (HR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.41-1.60 for each 1-point increase). CHA2DS2-VASc had a higher c statistic than CHADS2: 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69) versus 0.65 (95% CI, 0.62-0.67), P <.01. For CHADS2 scores <2, stroke risk almost doubled with every additional CHA2DS2-VASc point. CONCLUSIONS: Although both CHADS2, and CHA2DS2-VASc are predictive of stroke risk in postmenopausal women with atrial fibrillation, CHA2DS2-VASc further risk-stratifies patients with a CHADS2 score <2.
BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of atrial fibrillationpatients with a congestive heart failure (C), hypertension (H), age ≥ 75 (A), diabetes (D), stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (S2) (CHADS2) score of <2 remains imprecise, particularly in women. Our objectives were to validate the CHADS2 and congestive heart failure (C), hypertension (H), age ≥ 75 (A2), diabetes (D), stroke, TIA or prior thromboembolic disease (S2)- vascular disease (V), age 65-74 (A), female gender (S) (CHA2DS2-VASc) stroke risk scores in a healthy cohort of American women with atrial fibrillation and to determine whether CHA2DS2-VASc further risk-stratifies individuals with a CHADS2 score of <2. METHODS: We identified a cohort of 5981 women with atrial fibrillation not on warfarin at baseline (mean age 65.9 ± 7.2 years) enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative and followed for a median of 11.8 years. Univariate and multivariate proportional hazards analyses were used to examine these 2 risk scores, with main outcome measures being annualized event rates of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack stratified by risk score. RESULTS: Annualized stroke/transient ischemic attack rates ranged from 0.36% to 2.43% with increasing CHADS2 score (0-4+) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-1.71 for each 1-point increase) and 0.20%-2.02% with increasing CHA2DS2-VASc score (1-6+) (HR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.41-1.60 for each 1-point increase). CHA2DS2-VASc had a higher c statistic than CHADS2: 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69) versus 0.65 (95% CI, 0.62-0.67), P <.01. For CHADS2 scores <2, stroke risk almost doubled with every additional CHA2DS2-VASc point. CONCLUSIONS: Although both CHADS2, and CHA2DS2-VASc are predictive of stroke risk in postmenopausal women with atrial fibrillation, CHA2DS2-VASc further risk-stratifies patients with a CHADS2 score <2.
Authors: Jennifer Hays; Julie R Hunt; F Allan Hubbell; Garnet L Anderson; Marian Limacher; Catherine Allen; Jacques E Rossouw Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Margaret C Fang; Daniel E Singer; Yuchiao Chang; Elaine M Hylek; Lori E Henault; Nancy G Jensvold; Alan S Go Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-09-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Yoko Miyasaka; Marion E Barnes; Bernard J Gersh; Stephen S Cha; Kent R Bailey; Walter P Abhayaratna; James B Seward; Teresa S M Tsang Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-07-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Thomas J Wang; Joseph M Massaro; Daniel Levy; Ramachandran S Vasan; Philip A Wolf; Ralph B D'Agostino; Martin G Larson; William B Kannel; Emelia J Benjamin Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-08-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Tracy E Madsen; Xi Luo; Mengna Huang; Ki E Park; Marcia L Stefanick; JoAnn E Manson; Simin Liu Journal: Stroke Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Nisha I Parikh; Rebecca P Jeppson; Jeffrey S Berger; Charles B Eaton; Candyce H Kroenke; Erin S LeBlanc; Cora E Lewis; Eric B Loucks; Donna R Parker; Eileen Rillamas-Sun; Kelli K Ryckman; Molly E Waring; Robert S Schenken; Karen C Johnson; Anna-Karin Edstedt-Bonamy; Matthew A Allison; Barbara V Howard Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ethan D Borre; Adam Goode; Giselle Raitz; Bimal Shah; Angela Lowenstern; Ranee Chatterjee; Lauren Sharan; Nancy M Allen LaPointe; Roshini Yapa; J Kelly Davis; Kathryn Lallinger; Robyn Schmidt; Andrzej Kosinski; Sana M Al-Khatib; Gillian D Sanders Journal: Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 6.681
Authors: Gene R Quinn; Olivia N Severdija; Yuchiao Chang; Liane O Dallalzadeh; Daniel E Singer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-06-09 Impact factor: 5.501