Embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) is a significant subtype within the spectrum of cryptogenic strokes, defined by non-lacunar brain infarcts where there is no evidence of significant proximal large artery atherosclerosis or a major cardioembolic source like atrial fibrillation after a comprehensive diagnostic workup. Accounting for roughly 25% of ischaemic strokes, ESUS is associated with a substantial annual stroke recurrence rate of approximately 4.5%, contributing to 58% of stroke recurrence, which underscores the urgency for effective diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. However, the inherent variability of ESUS, where patients might harbour different underlying pathologies or risk factors, poses considerable challenges in both managing the acute phase and preventing further events. Recent clinical trials, such as NAVIGATE ESUS and ARCADIA, have explored the effectiveness of anticoagulation (AC) compared to antiplatelet (AP) therapy for secondary prevention, yet they have failed to establish a clear superior strategy, highlighting the limitations of a uniform treatment protocol. This review seeks to deepen the understanding of ESUS by critically appraising current diagnostic tools, management practices and preventive measures, advocating for a shift towards personalised treatment plans that take into account the unique clinical profile of each patient to optimise outcomes.
Specialist Insight
Trials over the last decade have not settled the ESUS treatment debate, yet they have underscored the importance of personalised medicine. The need for individualised AC or AP therapy for secondary prevention reflects this shift to precision medicine. Ongoing discussions about ESUS management highlight its heterogeneity, prompting research to establish clearer definitions of atrial cardiopathy and reduce overlap with other cardioembolic sources.
FeiginVL, StarkBA, JohnsonCO, . Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20(10):795–820.
2.
FeiginVL, AbateMD, AbateYH, . Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet Neurol. 2024;23(10):973–1003.
3.
KunitzSC, GrossCR, HeymanA, . The pilot Stroke Data Bank: definition, design, and data. Stroke. 1984;15(4):740–746.
4.
FoulkesMA, WolfPA, PriceTR, MohrJP, HierDB.The Stroke Data Bank: design, methods, and baseline characteristics. Stroke. 1988;19(5):547–554.
5.
AdamsHP, BendixenBH, KappelleLJ, . 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(1):35–41.
6.
Kolominsky-RabasPL, WeberM, GefellerO, NeundoerferB, HeuschmannPU.Epidemiology of ischemic stroke subtypes according to TOAST criteria. Stroke. 2001;32(12):2735–2740.
VeltkampR, PearceLA, KorompokiE, . Characteristics of recurrent ischemic stroke after embolic stroke of undetermined source: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(10):1233–1240.
12.
KamelH, PearceLA, NtaiosG, . Atrial cardiopathy and nonstenosing large artery plaque in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2020;51(3):938–943.
13.
DienerH-C, EastonJD, HartRG, KasnerS, KamelH, NtaiosG.Review and update of the concept of embolic stroke of undetermined source. Nat Rev Neurol. 2022;18(8):455–465.
14.
TsivgoulisG, KatsanosAH, KöhrmannM, . Embolic strokes of undetermined source: theoretical construct or useful clinical tool. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2019;12:1756286419851381.
15.
HartRG, SharmaM, MundlH, . Rivaroxaban for stroke prevention after embolic stroke of undetermined source. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(23):2191–2201.
16.
KamelH, LongstrethWTJr, TirschwellDL, . Apixaban to prevent recurrence after cryptogenic stroke in patients with atrial cardiopathy: the ARCADIA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2024;331(7):573–581.
17.
SaverJL.Cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(21):2065–2074.
18.
NtaiosG, VemmosK, LipGYH, . Risk stratification for recurrence and mortality in embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2016;47(9):2278–2285.
19.
JacobsBS, Boden-AlbalaB, LinI-F, SaccoRL.Stroke in the young in the Northern Manhattan Stroke Study. Stroke. 2002;33(12):2789–2793.
20.
ScullenTA, MonlezunDJ, SieglerJE, . Cryptogenic stroke: clinical consideration of a heterogeneous ischemic subtype. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24(5):993–999.
21.
KamelH, NaviBB, ParikhNS, . Machine learning prediction of stroke mechanism in embolic strokes of undetermined source. Stroke. 2020;51(9):e203–e210.
22.
NtaiosG, PearceLA, VeltkampR, . Potential embolic sources and outcomes in embolic stroke of undetermined source in the NAVIGATE-ESUS Trial. Stroke. 2020;51(6):1797–1804.
23.
Boeckh-BehrensT, KleineJF, ZimmerC, . Thrombus histology suggests cardioembolic cause in cryptogenic stroke. Stroke. 2016;47(7):1864–1871.
24.
A-MSinha, H-CDiener, MorilloCA, . Cryptogenic Stroke and underlying Atrial Fibrillation (CRYSTAL AF): design and rationale. Am Heart J. 2010;160(1):36–41.e1.
25.
TommasoS, Hans-ChristophD, PassmanRS, . Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(26):2478–2486.
26.
KamelH, JohnsonDR, HegdeM, . Detection of atrial fibrillation after stroke and the risk of recurrent stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;21(8):726–731.
27.
Hans-ChristophD, SaccoRL, DonaldEJ, . Dabigatran for prevention of stroke after embolic stroke of undetermined source. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(20):1906–1917.
28.
TobiasG, TimeaK, PeterM, . Apixaban versus aspirin for embolic stroke of undetermined source. NEJM Evid. 2023;3(1):EVIDoa2300235.
29.
KasnerSE, LattanziS, FonsecaAC, ElgendyAY.Uncertainties and controversies in the management of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack patients with patent foramen ovale. Stroke. 2021;52(12):e806–e819.
30.
ElgendyAY, SaverJL, AminZ, . Proposal for updated nomenclature and classification of potential causative mechanism in patent foramen ovale-associated stroke. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(7):878–886.
31.
StramboD, SirimarcoG, NannoniS, . Embolic stroke of undetermined source and patent foramen ovale. Stroke. 2021;52(5):1643–1652.
32.
SaverJL, MattleHP, ThalerD.Patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for cryptogenic ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2018;49(6):1541–1548.
33.
LouJ, BaoY, LvT, YangY.Computed tomography for detecting patent foramen ovale: a meta-analysis. Heart Surg Forum. 2022;25(6):E849–E853.
34.
Hamilton-CraigC, SestitoA, NataleL, . Contrast transoesophageal echocardiography remains superior to contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of patent foramen ovale. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2011;12(3):222–227.
35.
ZahuranecDB, MuellerGC, BachDS, . Pilot study of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for detection of embolic source after ischemic stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;21(8):794–800.
36.
KamelH, BartzTM, ElkindMSV, . Atrial cardiopathy and the risk of ischemic stroke in the CHS (Cardiovascular Health Study). Stroke. 2018;49(4):980–986.
37.
FonsecaAC, AlvesP, InácioN, . Patients with undetermined stroke have increased atrial fibrosis. Stroke. 2018;49(3):734–737.
38.
KamelH, OkinPM, LongstrethWTJr, ElkindMSV, SolimanEZ.Atrial cardiopathy: a broadened concept of left atrial thromboembolism beyond atrial fibrillation. Future Cardiol. 2015;11(3):323–331.
39.
ElkindMSV.Atrial cardiopathy and stroke prevention. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018;20(11):103.
KajermoU, UlvenstamA, ModicaA, JernbergT, MooeT.Incidence, trends, and predictors of ischemic stroke 30 days after an acute myocardial infarction. Stroke. 2014;45(5):1324–1330.
42.
MerklerAE, DiazI, WuX, . Duration of heightened ischemic stroke risk after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(22):e010782.
MerklerAE, BartzTM, KamelH, . Silent myocardial infarction and subsequent ischemic stroke in the Cardiovascular Health Study. Neurology. 2021;97(5):e436–e443.
45.
de TorbalA, BoersmaE, KorsJA, . Incidence of recognized and unrecognized myocardial infarction in men and women aged 55 and older: the Rotterdam Study. Eur Heart J. 2006;27(6):729–736.
46.
SigurdssonE, ThorgeirssonG, SigvaldasonH, SigfussonN.Unrecognized myocardial infarction: epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and the prognostic role of angina pectoris: the Reykjavik Study. Ann Intern Med. 1995;122(2):96–102.
47.
PrideYB, PiccirilloBJ, GibsonCM.Prevalence, consequences, and implications for clinical trials of unrecognized myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2013;111(6):914–918.
48.
MerklerAE, SigurdssonS, EiriksdottirG, . Association between unrecognized myocardial infarction and cerebral infarction on magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76(8):956–961.
49.
BarbierCE, NylanderR, ThemudoR, . Prevalence of unrecognized myocardial infarction detected with magnetic resonance imaging and its relationship to cerebral ischemic lesions in both sexes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(13):1372–1377.
50.
KamelH, MerklerAE, IadecolaC, GuptaA, NaviBB.Tailoring the approach to embolic stroke of undetermined source: a review. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76(7):855–861.
51.
FreilingerTM, SchindlerA, SchmidtC, . Prevalence of nonstenosing, complicated atherosclerotic plaques in cryptogenic stroke. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5(4):397–405.
52.
Anon. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Methods, patient characteristics, and progress. Stroke. 1991;22(6):711–720.
53.
NtaiosG, SwaminathanB, BerkowitzSD, . Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban versus aspirin in embolic stroke of undetermined source and carotid atherosclerosis. Stroke. 2019;50(9):2477–2485.
54.
Kamtchum-TatueneJ, WilmanA, SaqqurM, ShuaibA, JicklingGC.Carotid plaque with high-risk features in embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2020;51(1):311–314.
55.
CoutinhoJM, DerkatchS, PotvinARJ, . Nonstenotic carotid plaque on CT angiography in patients with cryptogenic stroke. Neurology. 2016;87(7):665–672.
56.
GoyalM, SinghN, MarkoM, . Embolic stroke of undetermined source and symptomatic nonstenotic carotid disease. Stroke. 2020;51(4):1321–1325.
57.
RothwellPM, GibsonR, WarlowCP.Interrelation between plaque surface morphology and degree of stenosis on carotid angiograms and the risk of ischemic stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Stroke. 2000;31(3):615–621.
58.
GuptaA, GialdiniG, GiambroneAE, . Association between nonstenosing carotid artery plaque on MR angiography and acute ischemic stroke. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9(10):1228–1229.
59.
StaryHC.Natural history and histological classification of atherosclerotic lesions. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2000;20(5):1177–1178.
60.
Bayer-KarpinskaA, SchwarzF, WollenweberFA, . The carotid plaque imaging in acute stroke (CAPIAS) study: protocol and initial baseline data. BMC Neurol. 2013;13(1):201.
GrausF, RogersLR, PosnerJB.Cerebrovascular complications in patients with cancer. Medicine. 1985;64(1):16–35.
63.
VarkiA.Trousseau’s syndrome: multiple definitions and multiple mechanisms. Blood. 2007;110(6):1723–1729.
64.
TacconeFS, JeangetteSM, BlecicSA.First-ever stroke as initial presentation of systemic cancer. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2008;17(4):169–174.
65.
KwonH-M, KangBS, YoonB-W.Stroke as the first manifestation of concealed cancer. J Neurol Sci. 2007;258(1):80–83.
66.
MurinelloA, GuedesP, RochaG, . Trousseau’s syndrome due to asymptomatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. GE Port J Gastroenterol. 2013;20(4):172–176.
67.
NouhAM, StaffI, FinelliPF.Three territory sign: an MRI marker of malignancy-related ischemic stroke (Trousseau syndrome). Neurol Clin Pract. 2019;9(2):124–128.
68.
GoyalM, MenonBK, van ZwamWH, . Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet. 2016;387(10029):1723–1731.
69.
JovinTG, NogueiraRG, LansbergMG, . Thrombectomy for anterior circulation stroke beyond 6 h from time last known well (AURORA): a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet. 2022;399(10321):249–258.
70.
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581–1588.
71.
KleindorferDO, TowfighiA, ChaturvediS, . 2021 guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2021;52(7):e364–e467.
72.
HackamDG, SpenceJD.Combining multiple approaches for the secondary prevention of vascular events after stroke. Stroke. 2007;38(6):1881–1885.
73.
MohrJP, ThompsonJLP, LazarRM, . A comparison of warfarin and aspirin for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2024;345(20):1444–1451.
74.
GiuglianoRP, RuffCT, RostNS, . Cerebrovascular events in 21 105 patients with atrial fibrillation randomized to edoxaban versus warfarin. Stroke. 2014;45(8):2372–2378.
75.
PatelMR, MahaffeyKW, GargJ, . Rivaroxaban versus Warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(10):883–891.
76.
JohansenMC, GeocadinRG, KamelH.Embolic stroke of unknown source clinical trials and advances in research. Ann Neurol. 2020;88(3):462–463.
77.
LansbergMG, WintermarkM, ChenH, . Apixaban to prevent covert infarcts after cryptogenic stroke in patients with atrial cardiopathy: a secondary analysis of the ARCADIA Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2025:e244838.
78.
GhannamM, Al-QudahAM, AlshaerQN, . Anticoagulation vs antiplatelets across subgroups of embolic stroke of undetermined source. Neurology. 2024;103(9):e209949.
79.
FurlanAJ, ReismanM, MassaroJ, . Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(11):991–999.
80.
CarrollJD, SaverJL, ThalerDE, . Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1092–1100.
81.
MeierB, KalesanB, MattleHP, . Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic embolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1083–1091.
82.
KentDM, SaverJL, RuthazerR, . Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE)—estimated attributable fraction correlates with the benefit of patent foramen ovale closure. Stroke. 2020;51(10):3119–3123.
83.
AhmadY, HowardJP, ArnoldA, . Patent foramen ovale closure vs. medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(18):1638–1649.
84.
BoschJ, EikelboomJW, ConnollySJ, . Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of participants in the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) Trial. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33(8):1027–1035.
85.
SharmaM, HartRG, ConnollySJ, . Stroke outcomes in the COMPASS Trial. Circulation. 2019;139(9):1134–1145.
86.
AnandSS, BoschJ, EikelboomJW, . Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable peripheral or carotid artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10117):219–229.
87.
PicciniJP, HarringtonJ.Midregional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide and atrial fibrillation: interesting association or practice changing? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(14):1382–1384.
Hodgson-ZingmanDM, KarstML, ZingmanLV, . Atrial natriuretic peptide frameshift mutation in familial atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2024;359(2):158–165.
90.
ChengC, LiuH, TanC, . Mutation in NPPA causes atrial fibrillation by activating inflammation and cardiac fibrosis in a knock-in rat model. FASEB J. 2019;33(8):8878–8891.
91.
Rahbar KouibaranF, SabatinoM, BarozziC, DiembergerI.Atrial natriuretic peptides as a bridge between atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and amyloidosis of the atria. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(7):6470.
