ArticleEuropean stroke journal2025
Multiparametric assessment of atrial cardiopathy in cryptogenic stroke patients: Implications for personalized clinical management.
Article in European stroke journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCryptogenic stroke (CS) represents a heterogeneous group in terms of etiology. Atrial cardiopathy (AC) has emerged as a relevant underlying substrate for both stroke and atrial fibrillation (AF) in these patients. However, no reliable tools are currently available for the early and accurate identification of AC. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe conducted a prospective study including consecutive patients with cardioembolic stroke due to AF (CES-AF), non-cardioembolic stroke (NCES) and cryptogenic stroke (CS). Left atrial strain (LAS) assessed by speckle-tracking echocardiography, and serum markers of AC were evaluated in CES-AF versus NCES patients using ROC curve analysis. Based on these results, we developed a logistic regression model to calculate the probability of AC in CS patients, aiming to discriminate between cardioembolic and non-cardioembolic etiology. Clinical characteristics were compared between CS patients with high (>0.5) and low (<0.5) predicted probability of AC.
resultsA total of 136 patients were included: 44 with CES-AF, 52 with NCES, and 40 with CS. The combination of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels ⩾ 469 pg/mL and biplanar LAS during the contraction phase (LASct) ⩾ -10.2% demonstrated the best-performing AC biomarker combination among those evaluated for identifying cardioembolic etiology (AUC = 0.995). Based on this combination, 30% of CS patients had a predicted probability > 0.5 for AC. These patients were older (77.3 ± 8 vs 68.8 ± 10 years;
conclusionsThe combination of NT-proBNP levels and biplanar LASct provides highly sensitive and specific biomarkers of AC. This multiparametric model allows for individualized estimation of AC probability in CS patients, supporting its potential utility in discriminating cardioembolic from non-cardioembolic etiologies and guiding personalized clinical management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.