Comparison of CT in patients with cerebral ischaemia with or without non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. European Atrial Fibrillation Trial and Dutch T I A Trial Study Groups.

  • van Latum J
  • Koudstaal P
  • Kappelle L
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In an attempt to distinguish between the CT characteristics of strokes of presumed cardioembolic origin and strokes caused by arterial disease, a comparison was made between the baseline CT of two prospective cohorts of patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke, with (n = 985) or without (n = 2987) non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation (NRAF). Of the patients with NRAF 54% had evidence of cerebral infarction v 41% of the controls (patients with sinus rhythm (SR); odds ratio (OR) 1.7; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.4-1.9). Patients with NRAF more often had multiple infarcts (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1-1.8), and more often infarcts that were not related to current neurological symptoms (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-1.8). For symptomatic infarcts, patients with NRAF more often had cortical end zone infarcts (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.6-3.8) and cortical border zone infarcts (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3-2.9) than patients with SR. Conversely, symptomatic small deep infarcts (lacunae) were more often seen in patients with SR (OR 3.9; 95% CI 2.8-5.4). Multivariate analyses showed that all these findings were independent of differences in baseline characteristics between the two study groups. The CT characteristics overlapped and did not allow a reliable distinction between cardioembolic and atherosclerotic causes of stroke in patients with NRAF.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

van Latum, J., Koudstaal, P. J., Kappelle, L. J., van Kooten, F., Algra, A., & van Gijn, J. (1995). Comparison of CT in patients with cerebral ischaemia with or without non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. European Atrial Fibrillation Trial and Dutch T I A Trial Study Groups. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 59(2), 132–137. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.59.2.132

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free