The ABCD and ABCD2 Scores and the Risk of Stroke following a TIA: A Narrative Review

  • Bhatt A
  • Jani V
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The California, ABCD, and ABCD2 risk scores (ABCD system) were developed to help stratify short-term stroke risk in patients with TIA (transient ischemic attack). Beyond this scope, the ABCD system has been extensively used to study other prognostic information such as DWI (diffusion-weighted imaging) abnormalities, large artery stenosis, atrial fibrillation and its diagnostic accuracy in TIA patients, which are independent predictors of subsequent stroke in TIA patients. Our comprehensive paper suggested that all scores have and equivalent prognostic value in predicting short-term risk of stroke; however, the ABCD2 score is being predominantly used at most centers. The majority of studies have shown that more than half of the strokes in the first 90 days, occur in the first 7 days. The majority of patients studied were predominantly classified to have a higher ABCD/ABCD2 > 3 scores and were particularly at a higher short-term risk of stroke or TIA and other vascular events. However, patients with low risk ABCD2 score < 4 may have high-risk prognostic indicators, such as diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) abnormalities, large artery atherosclerosis (LAA), and atrial fibrillation (AF). The prognostic value of these scores improved if used in conjunction with clinical information, vascular imaging data, and brain imaging data. Before more data become available, the diagnostic value of these scores, its applicability in triaging patients, and its use in evaluating long-term prognosis are rather secondary; thus, indicating that the primary significance of these scores is for short-term prognostic purposes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bhatt, A., & Jani, V. (2011). The ABCD and ABCD2 Scores and the Risk of Stroke following a TIA: A Narrative Review. ISRN Neurology, 2011, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/518621

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