Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction

Incomplete evaluation of stroke patients may result in an unclear diagnosis. Our objective was to determine if older stroke patients more often undergo incomplete diagnostic evaluations versus younger patients in an international cohort.

Patients and methods

The Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source Global Registry was a retrospective cohort of consecutive stroke patients evaluated at 19 stroke centers in 19 countries. Diagnostic evaluation was considered as complete if the patient had, at a minimum, brain computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging with evidence of infarction, extracranial and intracranial vascular imaging, electrocardiography, ≥24 h of cardiac rhythm monitoring, and echocardiography. Patients were diagnosed with Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source if brain imaging confirmed a nonlacunar infarction and no stroke etiology was determined after complete evaluation. Completeness of evaluation was compared between patients ≥75 versus <75 years old.

Results

The registry included 2132 patients with recent ischemic stroke during 2013–2014, of which 349 were diagnosed with Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source. Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source patients ≥75 years were less likely to undergo brain magnetic resonance imaging (74% versus 89%, p = 0.001), transesophageal echocardiography (22% versus 39%, p = 0.005), and combination transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography (16% versus 32%, p = 0.005) compared with Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source patients <75 years.

Discussion

Our study has identified an international age disparity in fundamental diagnostic testing for older patients with stroke of unknown etiology. Some testing biases were affected by geographic location (e.g., brain MRI was less frequently used in European ESUS patients), whereas other testing was implemented less frequently in the elderly regardless of location (e.g., transesophageal echocardiogram).

Conclusion

Older patients in this international cohort had less sophisticated diagnostic testing for stroke, despite advanced age being well established as an independent risk factor for recurrent stroke. This was a global problem and further investigations are warranted to explore the cause.

Keywords

Cryptogenic stroke etiology diagnostics disparities age

Introduction

Cryptogenic stroke is one of the major etiologic stroke subtypes, accounting for as many as one in three strokes.¹ It is a diagnosis of exclusion and requires thorough evaluation in order to exclude the more well-defined stroke subtypes. However, cryptogenic stroke also includes patients with incomplete diagnostic testing. Recently, embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) was defined as an ischemic stroke, nonlacunar in radiographic appearance, without evidence of stenosis detected by carotid imaging or obvious cardioembolic source after electrocardiography (EKG), transthoracic echocardiography, and at least 24 h of cardiac rhythm monitoring have been completed.² This definition sets a minimum standard for diagnostic evaluation but leaves further testing to the discretion of the treating clinician and patient. Given how invasive, potentially risky, costly, and/or time consuming, several additionally available diagnostic tools (including transesophageal echocardiography, implantable cardiac event monitors, intracranial vascular imaging, blood tests, and others) may be, it stands to reason that some may choose against extensive evaluation.^3–6 In contrast, since cryptogenic stroke has a substantial rate of recurrence⁷ and a known etiology of stroke can be discovered in a considerable proportion of these patients,^4,8,9 these tests may be valuable in the prevention of recurrent stroke. Elderly patients are at particularly high risk for recurrent stroke,^10–12 which makes etiologic identification critical to their management. Several treatable risk factors, such as paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF), are associated with older age and with more severe strokes.^13,14 Consequently, patients and providers may believe that thorough diagnostic testing may not be worthwhile. However, the discovery of a treatable cause of stroke (such as PAF) and optimization of secondary prophylaxis (oral anticoagulation) could dramatically reduce the risk among these patients who would otherwise have been misclassified and treated as cryptogenic stroke.¹⁵

In the present study, we aimed to identify if age was associated with incomplete evaluation for cryptogenic strokes using a multinational ESUS global stroke registry.² We hypothesized that elderly patients would be at greater risk for incompleteness in their stroke evaluation than younger patients, both in the overall stroke population and in the subset with ESUS.

Methods

Patient population

The ESUS Global Registry is a retrospective cohort of consecutive ischemic stroke patients evaluated at 19 stroke centers in 19 countries.¹⁶ Briefly, a nine-page case report form was completed for each patient by a physician provided with specific instructions and definitions. Data were entered into a central database via online data entry or via an automated fax-based data entry system. Missing data were queried, and final data were exported to SAS software, version 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) for statistical analysis.

Consecutive stroke patients were identified from stroke logs at each hospital once the local institutional review board or ethical committee approved this investigation. All consecutive patients were included in the final cohort of 2132 patients. Patients older than 18 years of age were included if they experienced focal neurologic deficits lasting ≥24 h and had neuroimaging without evidence of primary intracranial hemorrhage.

Patients were classified as having experienced ESUS if the stroke was identified as nonlacunar on neuroimaging, and no stroke etiology was determined despite at least 24 h of in-hospital cardiac rhythm monitoring, transthoracic echocardiography, and intracranial and cervical arterial imaging.² A lacunar infarction was defined as a subcortical ischemic infarct ≤1.5 cm in its greatest dimension which occurred in the distribution of small, penetrating cerebral arteries.² If other testing was performed beyond the minimal requirements, patients would be classified as having ESUS only if no other specific stroke etiology was identified.

Completeness of evaluation was compared between patients ≥75 years old and those <75 years old. Patients were further divided into age groups according to decade at the time of diagnosis (e.g. <30, 30–39, etc.), and according to geographic location (Europe, North America, Latin America, East Asia, and Pacific), for similar comparisons. Analyses were performed in the overall registry excluding patients with a reported history of atrial fibrillation, or atrial fibrillation detected on EKG or in-hospital telemetry, and in the subpopulation of ESUS patients.

The study complied with local institutional research board regulations. Informed consent was waived by each center’s institutional review board or ethics committee as these data were anonymized and retrospectively abstracted.

Statistics

Categorical data were summarized as percentages for all patients without atrial fibrillation as well as for ESUS patients. Comparisons between the two primary age groups and the various demographic and clinical characteristics were assessed using chi-square tests or Fisher’s exact test as appropriate. All analyses were performed using SAS software, version 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). A two-sided p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Comparisons across geographic regions were also made. We consider these analyses to be exploratory as they were performed to describe the data among groups, so adjustments for multiple comparisons were not made.

Results

All patients without atrial fibrillation

The ESUS global registry included 2132 consecutive patients with recent ischemic stroke during 2013–2014. After excluding 588 patients with either a history of atrial fibrillation, or atrial fibrillation on admission EKG or in-hospital telemetry, 1544 (72%) patients were analyzed according to age at time of presentation (Figure 1). Compared to patients younger than 75 years, a smaller proportion of patients ≥75 years underwent cervical arterial imaging (86% versus 92%, p = 0.001) and transthoracic echocardiography (73% versus 78%, p = 0.06), although the difference in echocardiography did not reach statistical significance (Table 1). Due to limitations of registry design, intracranial vascular imaging was only collected among patients with confirmed ESUS. Therefore, no comparisons were made among non-ESUS patients with regard to intracranial vascular imaging.

Figure 1.

Patient flowchart.

Table 1.

Diagnostic testing for “all patients without atrial fibrillation.”

	All patients without atrial fibrillation
	Age <75 (n = 1119)	Age ≥75 (n = 425)	p value
Cervical arterial imaging, no. (%)	1029 (92%)	367 (86%)	0.001
Cardiac rhythm monitoring >24 h, no. (%)	744 (67%)	301 (71%)	0.11
Echocardiography, no. (%)	870 (78%)	312 (73%)	0.06

Note: Data unavailable for intracranial vascular imaging due to limitations of initial registry design.

When evaluating diagnostic testing modalities among all patients without atrial fibrillation (n = 1544) according to age in decades, there were statistically significant differences in proportion of patients who underwent cervical arterial imaging (p = 0.03) and transthoracic echocardiography (p = 0.02), but not for cardiac rhythm monitoring (p = 0.24) (Figure 2). In these analyses, there was a downward trend in proportion of older patients after the age of 79 who received cervical arterial imaging and transthoracic echocardiography, whereas in-hospital cardiac rhythm monitoring was more routinely monitored regardless of age.

Figure 2.

Relationship between age and diagnostic testing (a) Cervical arterial imaging (p = 0.034). (b) In-hospital cardiac rhythm monitoring >24 h (p = 0.240). (c) Echocardiography (p = 0.024) (X-axis represents age in years at time of admission, Y-axis represents percentage of patients who completed the evaluation).

ESUS patients

In the subset of ESUS patients, the older cohort was more likely to be male and have hypertension and dyslipidemia (Table 2). Prior stroke was nearly twice as common among ESUS patients ≥75 years compared to younger ESUS patients. When evaluating completeness of diagnostic testing among the ESUS cohort, all patients underwent neuroimaging, extracranial and intracranial artery imaging, and echocardiography as required by the ESUS definition, but there were prominent differences in the types of tests performed in relation to age. Specifically, patients ≥75 years were less likely to have brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (74% versus 89%, p = 0.001), transesophageal echocardiography (22% versus 39%, p = 0.005), and combination transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography (16% versus 32%, p = 0.005). Patients ≥75 were more likely to undergo in-hospital telemetry for ≥24 h (73% versus 56%, p = 0.005).

Table 2.

Characteristics and diagnostic testing among patients with ESUS.

	ESUS patients
	Age <75 (N = 264)	Age ≥75 (N = 85)	p value
Sex, no. (%) female	159 (60%)	39 (46%)	0.03
Past medical history, no. (%)
Diabetes mellitus	66 (25%)	20 (24%)	0.78
Hypertension	158 (60%)	66 (80%)	0.001
Coronary artery disease	20 (8%)	13 (16%)	0.04
Prior stroke	31 (12%)	21 (25%)	0.004
Prior TIA	14 (5%)	6 (7%)	0.52
Heart failure	3 (1%)	3 (4%)	0.15
Dyslipidemia	87 (36%)	41 (51%)	0.02
CEA or carotid stenting	1 (0%)	5 (6%)	0.001
Peripheral vascular disease	4 (2%)	5 (7%)	0.02
Neuroimaging completed, no. (%)
HCT	189 (72%)	64 (75%)	0.51
MRI	234 (89%)	63 (74%)	0.001
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Cervical arterial imaging, no. (%)
CTA	68 (26%)	17 (20%)	0.28
MRA	120 (51%)	33 (42%)	0.15
Carotid ultrasound	140 (64%)	49 (66%)	0.76
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Intracranial vessel imaging, no. (%)
CTA	65 (25%)	17 (20%)	0.38
MRA	178 (67%)	48 (56%)	0.07
Transcranial Doppler	110 (42%)	38 (45%)	0.62
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Cardiac rhythm monitoring, no. (%)
In-hospital telemetry ≥24 h	135 (56%)	60 (73%)	0.005
Holter monitor ≥24 h	175 (69%)	49 (62%)	0.26
Other extended monitor ≥24 h	21 (8%)	7 (9%)	0.90
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Echocardiography, no. (%)
Transthoracic echocardiogram	246 (93%)	80 (94%)	0.76
Transesophageal echocardiogram	103 (39%)	19 (22%)	0.005
Both	85 (32%)	14 (16%)	0.005
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Complete evaluation^a, no. (%)	264 (100%)	85 (100%)	0.57

CEA: carotid endarterectomy; CTA: computed tomographic angiography; ESUS: embolic stroke of undetermined source; HCT: head computed tomography; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; MRA: magnetic resonance angiography; TIA: transient ischemic attack.

ESUS patients were considered to have undergone complete evaluation if the following 5 diagnostic tests were performed: neuroimaging, intracranial vessel imaging, cervical arterial imaging, cardiac rhythm monitoring, and echocardiography.

In Europe, patients ≥75 were more likely to have brain CT (82% versus 67%) and less likely to have brain MRI when compared to patients <75 (55% versus 78%) (Table 3). In North America, CT angiogram of the neck was less frequently performed in patients ≥75 versus those <75 (27% versus 50%), whereas carotid ultrasound was more frequently performed in the elderly (100% versus 69%). Transcranial Doppler was also more frequently performed in patients ≥75 in North America versus patients <75 (36% versus 11%), while CT angiogram of the head was less frequently performed in the elderly (18% versus 47%). In-hospital telemetry was more frequently performed in patients ≥75 versus those <75 in all geographic locations except the Pacific. Transesophageal echocardiography was less frequently performed in patients ≥75 versus those <75, regardless of geographic location.

Table 3.

Diagnostic testing among ESUS patients according to geographic location.

	Europe (N = 141)		North America (N = 47)		Latin America (N = 59)		Eastern Asia (N = 55)		Pacific (N = 47)		P-value^b
	Age <75^a	Age ≥75	Age <75^a	Age ≥75	Age <75^a	Age ≥75	Age <75^a	Age ≥75	Age <75^a	Age ≥75
	(N = 97)	(N = 44)	(N = 36)	(N = 11)	(N = 46)	(N = 13)	(N = 46)	(N = 9)	(N = 39)	(N = 8)
Neuroimaging completed
CT	65 (67%)	36 (82%)	34 (94%)	11 (100%)	37 (80%)	8 (62%)	34 (74%)	4 (44%)	19 (49%)	5 (63%)	0.08
MRI	76 (78%)	24 (55%)	31 (86%)	10 (91%)	43 (93%)	13 (100%)	46 (100%)	9 (100%)	38 (97%)	7 (88%)	0.75
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
Cervical arterial imaging
CT angiogram neck	17 (18%)	10 (23%)	18 (50%)	3 (27%)	13 (28%)	1 (8%)	14 (30%)	2 (22%)	6 (15%)	1 (13%)	0.40
MR angiogram neck	26 (28%)	10 (24%)	10 (48%)	3 (38%)	24 (53%)	7 (54%)	22 (59%)	6 (67%)	38 (97%)	7 (88%)	0.81
Carotid ultrasound	66 (75%)	30 (75%)	9 (69%)	5 (100%)	38 (88%)	9 (69%)	13 (35%)	2 (25%)	14 (38%)	3 (38%)	0.72
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
Intracranial vessel imaging
Transcranial Doppler	67 (69%)	31 (70%)	4 (11%)	4 (36%)	15 (33%)	1 (8%)	24 (52%)	1 (11%)	0 (0%)	1 (13%)	0.04
MR angiogram head	43 (44%)	17 (39%)	20 (56%)	5 (45%)	32 (70%)	11 (85%)	45 (98%)	8 (89%)	38 (97%)	7 (88%)	0.43
CT angiogram head	17 (18%)	10 (23%)	17 (47%)	2 (18%)	13 (28%)	3 (23%)	13 (28%)	1 (11%)	5 (13%)	1 (13%)	0.39
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
Prolonged cardiac rhythm monitoring
In-hospital telemetry ≥24 h	68 (72%)	36 (82%)	12 (46%)	8 (89%)	21 (57%)	9 (75%)	14 (31%)	4 (44%)	20 (51%)	3 (38%)	0.37
Holter monitor for 24 h	57 (59%)	24 (55%)	23 (66%)	4 (36%)	33 (87%)	7 (100%)	42 (91%)	9 (100%)	20 (53%)	5 (63%)	0.65
Holter or other extended monitor for >24 h	4 (4%)	2 (5%)	5 (14%)	2 (18%)	4 (10%)	3 (33%)	6 (13%)	0 (0%)	2 (5%)	0 (0%)	0.81
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
Echocardiography
Transthoracic echocardiography	84 (87%)	39 (89%)	35 (97%)	11 (100%)	42 (91%)	13 (100%)	46 (100%)	9 (100%)	39 (100%)	8 (100%)	>0.90
Transesophageal echocardiography	43 (44%)	13 (30%)	14 (39%)	1 (9%)	12 (26%)	0 (0%)	30 (65%)	5 (56%)	4 (10%)	0 (0%)	0.86
Both	30 (31%)	8 (18%)	13 (36%)	1 (9%)	8 (17%)	0 (0%)	30 (65%)	5 (56%)	4 (10%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
None of the above	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	>0.90
Complete workup^c	97 (100%)	44 (100%)	36 (100%)	11 (100%)	46 (100%)	13 (100%)	45 (98%)	9 (100%)	39 (100%)	8 (100%)	>0.90

CT: computed tomography; ESUS: embolic stroke of undetermined source; MR: magnetic resonance; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging.

Patients under age 18 were excluded.

P-value for the test of interactions between age groups and geographic locations is reported.

ESUS patients were considered to have undergone complete evaluation if the following five diagnostic tests were performed: neuroimaging, intracranial vessel imaging, cervical arterial imaging, cardiac rhythm monitoring, and echocardiography.

Discussion

Our results from the ESUS Global Registry have identified an international age disparity in stroke evaluation. Similar reports concerning the age disparity in stroke management have been published^17–22; however, our results are unique in several ways. We found that older patients with stroke are less likely to receive a complete initial battery of diagnostic testing. This may represent an important contributing factor for undertreatment of the elderly. Furthermore, while other international investigations identified an age disparity in general stroke evaluation,¹⁹ our results are novel in that we observed a persistent bias against etiologic evaluation among older patients with cryptogenic stroke.

Our results also expand on single country cohorts^17,21,23 in that our global population represents many cultures, health behaviors, socioeconomic settings, and various levels of access to diagnostic testing and early treatment. When specifically analyzed by geographic location, transesophageal echocardiogram was ordered less frequently in patients ≥75 regardless of the patient’s location. This may be attributed to risk of sedation or intraoperative complications that increase with age and accumulated comorbidities. Other disparities in diagnostic testing for ESUS appear weighted heavily by geography. For example, MRI of the brain was ordered less frequently among European ESUS patients ≥75 compared to those <75, while noncontrast head CT remained the neuroimaging modality of choice in Europe. This effect appears to have driven the statistical significance of this finding within the global registry. Although MRI is more sensitive for identifying stroke than head CT, especially in hyperacute stroke,²⁴ all patients in this registry had confirmed infarction via neuroimaging regardless of the imaging modality. That being said, several studies have demonstrated utility of diffusion-weighted MRI in the etiologic diagnosis of stroke subtype.^25–27 Therefore, brain MRI should be considered in stroke patients where the mechanism remains unclear, particularly if a cardioembolic source is suspected.^26,27 Regarding intra- and extracranial vessel imaging, CT angiogram of the head and neck was ordered less frequently in North American patients ≥75 compared to those <75 (18% versus 47% and 27% versus 50%, respectively). Carotid ultrasound and transcranial Doppler remained the vascular imaging modalities of choice in this region despite the higher sensitivity for detecting cervical and intracranial atherosclerotic disease when using computed tomographic angiography or magnetic resonance imaging.^28,29 This finding may reflect a North American aversion to risking contrast-associated injury or additional radiation exposure in the elderly.

The downstream effects of these biases in stroke evaluation are clear. First and foremost, incomplete etiologic evaluation for stroke has been shown to impact the proportion of elderly patients who receive guideline-based therapies,^19–22,30 and may put these patients at greater risk of recurrent stroke, other major vascular events, and mortality.^10–12 Second, there are a significant number of elderly patients with treatable causes of stroke who would benefit from such targeted intervention.^20,31 Third, life expectancy is increasing, which means a growing number of elderly patients who may suffer from stroke as well as other comorbid diseases.³² Although patients with ESUS have no specific treatable etiology of stroke, their risk of future ischemic stroke remains high in cryptogenic patients—especially the risk of recurrent cryptogenic stroke.⁷ According to recent results from the Oxford Vascular study, the risk of recurrent infarct in cryptogenic stroke patients is just as great as strokes due to cardioembolic and large vessel disease.³³ Therefore, the etiologic identification and appropriate management of these patients may reduce long-term health costs associated with the morbidity of recurrent or progressive cerebro- and cardiovascular disease.³⁴

The explanation for the age disparity in stroke evaluations remains unclear and is a major limitation of the present study. Prior investigators have argued that physician uncertainty of the risks and benefits from standard treatment exists because randomized trials of stroke and other major vascular events underrepresent the elderly.^19,20,35,36 Older patients who suffer stroke may also have either known comorbidities that contraindicate certain standard-of-care measures (e.g. progressive liver disease and statin use, or frequent falls and anticoagulant use) that reassure providers against pursuing additional testing which may be deemed irrelevant or inappropriate for the patient. Furthermore, older patients with higher disability and mortality rates may undergo limited evaluations. Older stroke patients and/or family may decide against additional testing/treatment in order to improve quality of remaining life.^37–40 While many such reasons are justifiable, they may not fully explain the prominent age effect observed in this study. Elderly patients with good functional status, life expectancy, and adherence to treatment would likely benefit from thorough evaluation and treatment.

Despite the global scale of this investigation, this study has limitations. Notably, the definition of ESUS utilized in this stroke registry is relatively novel, but is more concrete than some of the earlier classifications for cryptogenic stroke.^41–43 At the time the ESUS methodology was originally described, it was undecided whether the presence of intracranial arterial stenosis would be considered as an exclusion criterion, and therefore criteria for the ESUS Global Registry Project only later integrated intracranial imaging results within the definition of ESUS. Further, we are limited in that no data were collected regarding assessment of code status or goals of patient care. The data collected in our global registry did not include socioeconomic variables or data pertaining to level of education, which might have impacted the extent of diagnostic testing and level of care. Additionally, for patients without an ESUS diagnosis demographic variables were incompletely reported from affiliated sites, thereby prohibiting comparisons of baseline differences between “all patients without atrial fibrillation.” Finally, it is unclear whether certain sites may be more significant contributors to the age disparity in diagnostic evaluation (e.g. those with comparatively fewer resources or personnel) when compared to other sites.

Of note, a significantly smaller proportion of patients aged 30–39 received complete evaluation (and evaluation according to specific diagnostic test category) compared to other patients. Because of the small number of patients in the youngest age groups, we speculate that the incomplete evaluation of these patients stems from two sources: First, sampling error given the small number of subjects. Second, the likely diagnosis of stroke etiology may have been made at admission (e.g. cervical artery dissection) and thereby preempted further evaluation.

Conclusions

This is the first study to demonstrate an international bias toward less complete diagnostic evaluation of patients with embolic stroke of unclear etiology according to patient age. Underdiagnosis persists and likely contributes to undertreatment and excessive recurrent stroke in this population. Further investigations are warranted to explore and resolve the potential bias in age-associated stroke evaluation completeness.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: SK receives consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Medtronic and Daiichi Sankyo. RGH receives research support and serves on advisory committees for Bayer Healthcare and Bristol Myers-Squibb. JB receives research support from Bayer Healthcare.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by grants from Bayer Healthcare, Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network, and the Hamilton Health Sciences Research Strategic Initiatives.

Ethical approval

The study was compliant with local institutional research board regulations of each participating center.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required at any site for this anonymized data collection based on medical record review.

Guarantor

SEK.

Contributorship

JES and SEK conceived the idea of the project and performed the literature review. MG, JB, RGH, and SEK were responsible for data management and insured ethical approval was obtained by participating centers. BS performed all data analysis. JES wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors reviewed and edited the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

None.

References

Kolominsky-Rabas

Weber

Gefeller

, et al. Epidemiology of ischemic stroke subtypes according to toast criteria: incidence, recurrence, and long-term survival in ischemic stroke subtypes: a population-based study. Stroke 2001; 32: 2735–2740.

Hart

Diener

Coutts

, et al. Embolic strokes of undetermined source: the case for a new clinical construct. Lancet Neurol 2014; 13: 429–438.

Kamel

Navi

Elijovich

, et al. Pilot randomized trial of outpatient cardiac monitoring after cryptogenic stroke. Stroke 2013; 44: 528–530.

Seet

Friedman

Rabinstein

. Prolonged rhythm monitoring for the detection of occult paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in ischemic stroke of unknown cause. Circulation 2011; 124: 477–486.

Bang

Ovbiagele

Kim

. Evaluation of cryptogenic stroke with advanced diagnostic techniques. Stroke 2014; 45: 1186–1194.

Grossman

Broderick

. Advances and challenges in treatment and prevention of ischemic stroke. Ann Neurol 2013; 74: 363–372.

Bang

Lee

Joo

, et al. Frequency and mechanisms of stroke recurrence after cryptogenic stroke. Ann Neurol 2003; 54: 227–234.

Favilla

Ingala

Jara

, et al. Predictors of finding occult atrial fibrillation after cryptogenic stroke. Stroke 2015; 46: 1210–1215.

Thijs

Brachmann

Morillo

, et al. Predictors for atrial fibrillation detection after cryptogenic stroke: Results from crystal AF. Neurology 2016; 86: 261–269.

10.

Dhamoon

Sciacca

Rundek

, et al. Recurrent stroke and cardiac risks after first ischemic stroke: The northern Manhattan study. Neurology 2006; 66: 641–646.

11.

Hankey

Jamrozik

Broadhurst

, et al. Long-term risk of first recurrent stroke in the Perth community stroke study. Stroke 1998; 29: 2491–2500.

12.

Wong

. Long-term mortality and recurrent stroke risk among Chinese stroke patients with predominant intracranial atherosclerosis. Stroke 2003; 34: 2361–2366.

13.

Appelros

Nydevik

Seiger

, et al. Predictors of severe stroke: influence of preexisting dementia and cardiac disorders. Stroke 2002; 33: 2357–2362.

14.

Lin

Wolf

Kelly-Hayes

, et al. Stroke severity in atrial fibrillation. The Framingham study. Stroke 1996; 27: 1760–1764.

15.

Tai

Albers

. Secondary prevention of atherothrombotic or cryptogenic stroke. Circulation 2014; 129: 527–531.

16.

Perera KS, Vanassche T, Bosch J, et al. Embolic strokes of undetermined source: prevalence and patient features in the ESUS global registry. Int J Stroke 2016. Epub. DOI: 10.1177/1747493016641967.

17.

Turaj

Slowik

Wnuk

, et al. Gender-related differences in diagnostic evaluation and outcome of ischemic stroke in Poland. Stroke 2009; 40: 980–982.

18.

Saposnik

Black

Hakim

, et al. Age disparities in stroke quality of care and delivery of health services. Stroke 2009; 40: 3328–3335.

19.

Di Carlo

Lamassa

Pracucci

, et al. Stroke in the very old: clinical presentation and determinants of 3-month functional outcome: A European perspective. European biomed study of stroke care group. Stroke 1999; 30: 2313–2319.

20.

Fonarow

Reeves

Zhao

, et al. Age-related differences in characteristics, performance measures, treatment trends, and outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke. Circulation 2010; 121: 879–891.

21.

Palnum

Petersen

Sorensen

, et al. Older patients with acute stroke in Denmark: quality of care and short-term mortality. A nationwide follow-up study. Age Ageing 2008; 37: 90–95.

22.

Bhalla

Grieve

Tilling

, et al. Older stroke patients in Europe: stroke care and determinants of outcome. Age Ageing 2004; 33: 618–624.

23.

Mullard

Reeves

Jacobs

, et al. Lipid testing and lipid-lowering therapy in hospitalized ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack patients: results from a statewide stroke registry. Stroke 2006; 37: 44–49.

24.

Chalela

Kidwell

Nentwich

, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in emergency assessment of patients with suspected acute stroke: a prospective comparison. Lancet 2007; 369: 293–298.

25.

Lee

Kidwell

Alger

, et al. Impact on stroke subtype diagnosis of early diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance angiography. Stroke 2000; 31: 1081–1089.

26.

Wessels

Rottger

Jauss

, et al. Identification of embolic stroke patterns by diffusion-weighted MRI in clinically defined lacunar stroke syndromes. Stroke 2005; 36: 757–761.

27.

Cho

Kim

Kwon

, et al. Significance of susceptibility vessel sign on T2*-weighted gradient echo imaging for identification of stroke subtypes. Stroke 2005; 36: 2379–2383.

28.

Khan

Rich

Clifton

, et al. Noninvasive detection of vertebral artery stenosis: a comparison of contrast-enhanced MR angiography, CT angiography, and ultrasound. Stroke 2009; 40: 3499–3503.

29.

Bash

Villablanca

Jahan

, et al. Intracranial vascular stenosis and occlusive disease: evaluation with CT angiography, MR angiography, and digital subtraction angiography. AJNR 2005; 26: 1012–1021.

30.

Raine

Wong

Ambler

, et al. Sociodemographic variations in the contribution of secondary drug prevention to stroke survival at middle and older ages: cohort study. BMJ 2009; 338: b1279.

31.

Grau

Weimar

Buggle

, et al. Risk factors, outcome, and treatment in subtypes of ischemic stroke: the German stroke data bank. Stroke 2001; 32: 2559–2566.

32.

Salomon

Wang

Freeman

, et al. Healthy life expectancy for 187 countries, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the global burden disease study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380: 2144–2162.

33.

Yiin

Geraghty

, et al. Incidence, outcome, risk factors, and long-term prognosis of cryptogenic transient ischaemic attack and ischaemic stroke: a population-based study. Lancet 2015; 14: 903–913.

34.

Hankey

Warlow

. Treatment and secondary prevention of stroke: evidence, costs, and effects on individuals and populations. Lancet 1999; 354: 1457–1463.

35.

Kutner

Nixon

Silverstone

. Physicians’ attitudes toward oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents for stroke prevention in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151: 1950–1953.

36.

McCrory

Matchar

Samsa

, et al. Physician attitudes about anticoagulation for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in the elderly. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155: 277–281.

37.

Cook

Guyatt

Jaeschke

, et al. Determinants in canadian health care workers of the decision to withdraw life support from the critically ill. Canadian critical care trials group. JAMA 1995; 273: 703–708.

38.

Johnson

Lin

Mangalik

, et al. Patients’ perceptions of physicians’ recommendations for comfort care differ by patient age and gender. J Gen Intern Med 2000; 15: 248–255.

39.

Shepardson

Youngner

Speroff

, et al. Variation in the use of do-not-resuscitate orders in patients with stroke. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 1841–1847.

40.

Alexandrov

Bladin

Meslin

, et al. Do-not-resuscitate orders in acute stroke. Neurology 1995; 45: 634–640.

41.

Homma

Sacco

Di Tullio

, et al. Effect of medical treatment in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale: patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke study. Circulation 2002; 105: 2625–2631.

42.

Foulkes

Wolf

Price

, et al. The stroke data bank: design, methods, and baseline characteristics. Stroke 1988; 19: 547–554.

43.

Adams

Jr Bendixen

Kappelle

, et al. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. Toast. Trial of org 10172 in acute stroke treatment. Stroke 1993; 24: 35–41.

Age disparity in diagnostic evaluation of stroke patients: Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source Global Registry Project

Abstract

Introduction

Patients and methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Patient population

Statistics

Results

All patients without atrial fibrillation

ESUS patients

Discussion

Conclusions

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Guarantor

Contributorship

Acknowledgements

References