This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
In the article “Atrial cardiopathy in patients with embolic strokes of unknown source and other stroke etiologies,” Jalini et al. reported atrial cardiopathy in 26.6% of patients meeting the criteria for embolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS) vs 12.1% of patients with large artery atherosclerosis and 16.9% of those with small vessel disease in a cross-sectional study of 846 consecutive patients with ischemic stroke. They also found that patients with ESUS were younger, less hypertensive, and had higher cholesterol and low-density protein levels but fewer left ventricular or atrial abnormalities compared with yet another group with cardioembolism. In response, Drs. Lattanzi and Silvestrini note that they recently found an inverse association between abnormally increased P-wave terminal force in lead V1 (a marker of atrial cardiopathy) and paradoxical or artery-to-artery embolic sources in patients with ESUS. Patients with anterior circulation ESUS more often had ipsilateral (vs contralateral) internal carotid artery plaques with more concerning atherosclerotic findings, whereas younger patients with ESUS had higher incidence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) and lower rates of other vascular risk factors or markers of cardiopathy or atherosclerosis. Stating that ESUS is thus a heterogeneous entity, they encourage the identification of such distinct phenotypes to help guide secondary prevention and potentially targeted interventions. In their reply, the authors agree that the ESUS definition seems too broad and that factors such as PFO, aortic arch, and nonstenotic carotid plaques that were not addressed in their study are important embolic sources in subgroups of patients with ESUS. They note that ongoing trials in subgroups of patients with ESUS will further inform secondary prevention in this population.
In the article “Atrial cardiopathy in patients with embolic strokes of unknown source and other stroke etiologies,” Jalini et al. reported atrial cardiopathy in 26.6% of patients meeting the criteria for embolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS) vs 12.1% of patients with large artery atherosclerosis and 16.9% of those with small vessel disease in a cross-sectional study of 846 consecutive patients with ischemic stroke. They also found that patients with ESUS were younger, less hypertensive, and had higher cholesterol and low-density protein levels but fewer left ventricular or atrial abnormalities compared with yet another group with cardioembolism. In response, Drs. Lattanzi and Silvestrini note that they recently found an inverse association between abnormally increased P-wave terminal force in lead V1 (a marker of atrial cardiopathy) and paradoxical or artery-to-artery embolic sources in patients with ESUS. Patients with anterior circulation ESUS more often had ipsilateral (vs contralateral) internal carotid artery plaques with more concerning atherosclerotic findings, whereas younger patients with ESUS had higher incidence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) and lower rates of other vascular risk factors or markers of cardiopathy or atherosclerosis. Stating that ESUS is thus a heterogeneous entity, they encourage the identification of such distinct phenotypes to help guide secondary prevention and potentially targeted interventions. In their reply, the authors agree that the ESUS definition seems too broad and that factors such as PFO, aortic arch, and nonstenotic carotid plaques that were not addressed in their study are important embolic sources in subgroups of patients with ESUS. They note that ongoing trials in subgroups of patients with ESUS will further inform secondary prevention in this population.
Footnotes
Author disclosures are available upon request (journal{at}neurology.org).
- © 2019 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.