Ping-Song Chou1,2, Bo-Lin Ho1,3, Yi-Hsin Chan4,5, Min-Hsien Wu6, Han-Hwa Hu7,8, A-Ching Chao1,2. 1. Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Neurology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 3. Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Municipal Gangshan Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 4. Cardiovascular Department, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 5. College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 6. Graduate Institute of Biochemical and Biomedical Engineering, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. 7. Department of Neurology, Taipei Medical University-Shaung Ho Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 8. Cerebrovascular Treatment and Research Center, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delayed detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with stroke. However, it is not well known whether delayed identification of AF in patients with stroke affects the prognosis of patients. AIMS: To evaluate the association between the timing of AF diagnosis after stroke and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We identified a cohort of all patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of first-ever ischaemic stroke, which was categorised into three groups, namely, non-AF, AF presenting with stroke and delayed AF diagnosis groups. The study patients were individually followed for 5 years to evaluate the occurrence of recurrent stroke and death. RESULTS: In total, 17 399 patients were hospitalised with first-ever ischemic stroke, of whom 16 261 constituted the non-AF group, 907 the AF presenting with stroke group and 231 the delayed AF diagnosis group. During the 5-year follow up, 2773 (17.1%), 175 (19.3%) and 68 (29.4%) patients in the non-AF, AF presenting with stroke and delayed AF diagnosis groups, respectively, were hospitalised for recurrent stroke. The delayed AF diagnosis group exhibited a 1.57-times higher risk of recurrent stroke than the AF presenting with stroke group, after adjustment for the CHA2DS2-VASc scores (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-2.08; P = 0.002). In addition, delayed diagnosis of AF significantly increased the risk of recurrent stroke in men, but not in women, after adjustment for the CHA2DS2-VASc scores. CONCLUSION: Delayed diagnosis of AF after stroke increased the risk of recurrent stroke, particularly in men.
BACKGROUND: Delayed detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with stroke. However, it is not well known whether delayed identification of AF in patients with stroke affects the prognosis of patients. AIMS: To evaluate the association between the timing of AF diagnosis after stroke and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We identified a cohort of all patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of first-ever ischaemic stroke, which was categorised into three groups, namely, non-AF, AF presenting with stroke and delayed AF diagnosis groups. The study patients were individually followed for 5 years to evaluate the occurrence of recurrent stroke and death. RESULTS: In total, 17 399 patients were hospitalised with first-ever ischemic stroke, of whom 16 261 constituted the non-AF group, 907 the AF presenting with stroke group and 231 the delayed AF diagnosis group. During the 5-year follow up, 2773 (17.1%), 175 (19.3%) and 68 (29.4%) patients in the non-AF, AF presenting with stroke and delayed AF diagnosis groups, respectively, were hospitalised for recurrent stroke. The delayed AF diagnosis group exhibited a 1.57-times higher risk of recurrent stroke than the AF presenting with stroke group, after adjustment for the CHA2DS2-VASc scores (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-2.08; P = 0.002). In addition, delayed diagnosis of AF significantly increased the risk of recurrent stroke in men, but not in women, after adjustment for the CHA2DS2-VASc scores. CONCLUSION: Delayed diagnosis of AF after stroke increased the risk of recurrent stroke, particularly in men.
Authors: Laura Amaya Pascasio; Miguel Quesada López; Juan Manuel García-Torrecillas; Antonio Arjona-Padillo; Patricia Martínez Sánchez Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-06-28 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Tuomas Jussi Lumikari; Jani Pirinen; Jukka Putaala; Gerli Sibolt; Anne Kerola; Sami Pakarinen; Mika Lehto; Tuomo Nieminen Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2020-09-27 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Tuomas J Lumikari; Jukka Putaala; Anne Kerola; Gerli Sibolt; Jani Pirinen; Sami Pakarinen; Mika Lehto; Tuomo Nieminen Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Claudia Carrarini; V Di Stefano; M Russo; F Dono; M Di Pietro; N Furia; M Onofrj; L Bonanni; M Faustino; M V De Angelis Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 4.379