Cargando…

Association Between Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, Wall Motion Abnormality, and Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether there is an association between left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) or LV wall motion abnormality and embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective, cross‐sectional study of patients with acute ischemic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramasamy, Shobana, Yaghi, Shadi, Salehi Omran, Setareh, Lerario, Michael P., Devereux, Richard, Okin, Peter M., Gupta, Ajay, Navi, Babak B., Kamel, Hooman, Merkler, Alexander E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6512092/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31057030
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.011593
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether there is an association between left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) or LV wall motion abnormality and embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective, cross‐sectional study of patients with acute ischemic stroke enrolled in the CAESAR (Cornell Acute Stroke Academic Registry) from 2011 to 2016. We restricted this study to patients with ESUS and, as controls, those with small‐ and large‐artery ischemic strokes. LVEF had to be above 35% to be considered ESUS. In a secondary analysis, we excluded patients with ESUS who had any evidence of ipsilateral carotid atherosclerosis. Multiple logistic regression was used to evaluate whether LVEF or LV wall motion abnormality was associated with ESUS. We performed a confirmatory study at another tertiary‐care center. We identified 885 patients with ESUS (n=503) or small‐ or large‐artery strokes (n=382). Among the entire cohort, LVEF was not associated with ESUS (odds ratio per 5% decrement in LVEF, 1.0; 95% CI, 1.0–1.1) and LV wall motion abnormality was not associated with ESUS (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5–1.6). The results were identical in our confirmatory study. In our secondary analysis excluding ESUS patients with any evidence of ipsilateral carotid atherosclerosis, there was an association between LVEF and ESUS (odds ratio per 5% decrement in LVEF, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0–1.5; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Among the entire cohort, no association existed between LVEF or LV wall motion abnormality and ESUS; however, after excluding ESUS patients with any evidence of ipsilateral carotid atherosclerosis, lower LVEF appeared to be associated with ESUS.