David Giannandrea1, Michele Romoli2,3, Chiara Padiglioni4, Paolo Eusebi5, Anna Mengoni6, Franco Galati7, Antonio Vecchio7, Silvia Cenciarelli4, Stefano Ricci4, Domenico Consoli7. 1. Neurology Department, Stroke Unit, Gubbio-Gualdo Tadino and Città di Castello Hospitals, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy. david.giannandrea@yahoo.com. 2. Neurology Clinic, University of Perugia-S. Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Perugia, Italy. 3. Neurology Unit, Department of Medicine, Rimini "Infermi" Hospital, AUSL Romagna, Rimini, Italy. 4. Neurology Department, Stroke Unit, Gubbio-Gualdo Tadino and Città di Castello Hospitals, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy. 5. Health Planning Service, Department of Epidemiology, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy. 6. Cardiology and Cardiovascular Physiopathology, S. Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Perugia, Italy. 7. Neurology Unit, G. Jazzolino Hospital, Vibo Valentia, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUD: The role of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in cryptogenic stroke (CS) is debated. Tools to predict PFO occurrence and attributable fraction are needed to guide cost-effective diagnostics and treatment. Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score relies on neuroimaging findings, which might be inconclusive in up to 30% of cases. METHODS: We developed a clinical-based easy tool to predict the presence and attributable fraction of PFO in CS patients, without using neuroimaging. The clinical RoPE (cRoPE) score, ranging 1-10, was elaborated through Delphi method from the original RoPE score, replacing cortical infarction with the Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project (OCSP) classification (lacunar stroke = 0 points, other subtypes = 1 point). Then, from the SISIFO (Studio Italiano di prevalenza nello Stroke Ischemico di pervietà del Forame Ovale, or Prevalence of Patent Foramen Ovale in Ischemic Stroke in Italy) study, a multicenter, prospective study on consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients (n = 1130) classified by Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) and OCSP criteria and undergoing PFO testing, we selected the VV-CDC cohort (Vibo Valentia, Città di Castello, n = 323) to test the accuracy of cRoPE in predicting PFO detection. We compared cRoPE with RoPE to verify cRoPE reliability. Finally, we tested, through ROC analysis, the performance of cRoPE depending on TOAST classification. RESULTS: Overall, PFO was detected in 21% in VV-CDC and in 23.4% in remaining SISIFO cohort (n = 807). cRoPEAUC and RoPEAUC were similar in VV-CDC. cRoPE performance was comparable with RoPE among CS (cRoPEAUC 0.76, 95%CI 0.67-0.85, RoPEAUC 0.75, 95%CI 0.66-0.84). Moving to the remaining SISIFO cohort, cRoPE confirmed satisfactory accuracy in predicting PFO detection in CS patients (cRoPEAUC 0.71, 95%CI 0.66-0.78, p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Conclusions: cRoPE might help in stratification of patients with CS, allowing accurate esteem of the likelihood of PFO to be found, especially in cases when neuroimaging is inconclusive.
BACKGROUD: The role of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in cryptogenic stroke (CS) is debated. Tools to predict PFO occurrence and attributable fraction are needed to guide cost-effective diagnostics and treatment. Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score relies on neuroimaging findings, which might be inconclusive in up to 30% of cases. METHODS: We developed a clinical-based easy tool to predict the presence and attributable fraction of PFO in CS patients, without using neuroimaging. The clinical RoPE (cRoPE) score, ranging 1-10, was elaborated through Delphi method from the original RoPE score, replacing cortical infarction with the Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project (OCSP) classification (lacunar stroke = 0 points, other subtypes = 1 point). Then, from the SISIFO (Studio Italiano di prevalenza nello Stroke Ischemico di pervietà del Forame Ovale, or Prevalence of Patent Foramen Ovale in Ischemic Stroke in Italy) study, a multicenter, prospective study on consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients (n = 1130) classified by Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) and OCSP criteria and undergoing PFO testing, we selected the VV-CDC cohort (Vibo Valentia, Città di Castello, n = 323) to test the accuracy of cRoPE in predicting PFO detection. We compared cRoPE with RoPE to verify cRoPE reliability. Finally, we tested, through ROC analysis, the performance of cRoPE depending on TOAST classification. RESULTS: Overall, PFO was detected in 21% in VV-CDC and in 23.4% in remaining SISIFO cohort (n = 807). cRoPEAUC and RoPEAUC were similar in VV-CDC. cRoPE performance was comparable with RoPE among CS (cRoPEAUC 0.76, 95%CI 0.67-0.85, RoPEAUC 0.75, 95%CI 0.66-0.84). Moving to the remaining SISIFO cohort, cRoPE confirmed satisfactory accuracy in predicting PFO detection in CS patients (cRoPEAUC 0.71, 95%CI 0.66-0.78, p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Conclusions: cRoPE might help in stratification of patients with CS, allowing accurate esteem of the likelihood of PFO to be found, especially in cases when neuroimaging is inconclusive.
Authors: Domenico Consoli; Maurizio Paciaroni; Franco Galati; Marco Aguggia; Maurizio Melis; Giovanni Malferrari; Arturo Consoli; Simone Vidale; Domenico Bosco; Paolo Cerrato; Simona Sacco; Carlo Gandolfo; Paolo Bovi; Carlo Serrati; Massimo Del Sette; Anna Cavallini; Marina Diomedi; Paolo Postorino; Paolo Reboldi; Stefano Ricci Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Ji Won Kim; Suk Jae Kim; Cindy W Yoon; Chang-Hyun Park; Kun Woo Kang; Soo Kyoung Kim; Yun-Hee Kim; Oh Young Bang Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2012-07-19 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Alessandro Stecco; Martina Quagliozzi; Eleonora Soligo; Andrea Naldi; Alessia Cassarà; Lorenzo Coppo; Roberta Rosso; Angelo Sante Bongo; Paola Amatuzzo; Francesco Buemi; Elena Guenzi; Alessandro Carriero Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: R Feurer; S Sadikovic; L Esposito; J Schwarze; A Bockelbrink; B Hemmer; D Sander; H Poppert Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2009-05-22 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: David M Kent; Robin Ruthazer; Christian Weimar; Jean-Louis Mas; Joaquín Serena; Shunichi Homma; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Marco R Di Tullio; Jennifer S Lutz; Mitchell S V Elkind; John Griffith; Cheryl Jaigobin; Heinrich P Mattle; Patrik Michel; Marie-Louise Mono; Krassen Nedeltchev; Federica Papetti; David E Thaler Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-07-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Lucia Carnero Montoro; Martin Ruiz Ortiz; Nick Paredes Hurtado; Monica Delgado Ortega; Ana Rodriguez Almodovar; Jose María Segura Saint-Gerons; Francisco Mazuelos Bellido; Juan Jose Ochoa Sepulveda; Roberto Valverde Moyano; Miguel Angel Romero Moreno; Manuel Pan Alvarez-Ossorio; Maria Dolores Mesa Rubio Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 3.307