Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2024
High Prevalence of New Clinically Significant Findings in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Unknown Source Evaluated by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04555538 (Atrial Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Unknown Source Without Documented Atrial Fibrillation), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Atrial Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Unknown Source Without Documented Atrial Fibrillation
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using clinical data to reclassify ESUS patients to large artery atherosclerotic or cardioembolic stroke mechanisms.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEmbolic stroke of unknown source (ESUS) accounts for 1 in 6 ischemic strokes. Current guidelines do not recommend routine cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in ESUS, and beyond the identification of cardioembolic sources, there are no data assessing new clinical findings from CMR in ESUS. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of new cardiac and noncardiac findings and to determine their impact on clinical care in patients with ESUS. METHODS AND
resultsIn this prospective, multicenter, observational study, CMR imaging was performed within 3 months of ESUS. All scans were reported according to standard clinical practice. A new clinical finding was defined as one not previously identified through prior clinical evaluation. A clinically significant finding was defined as one resulting in further investigation, follow-up, or treatment. A change in patient care was defined as initiation of medical, interventional, surgical, or palliative care. From 102 patients recruited, 96 underwent CMR imaging. One or more new clinical findings were observed in 59 patients (61%). New findings were clinically significant in 48 (81%) of these patients. Of 40 patients with a new clinically significant cardiac finding, 21 (53%) experienced a change in care (medical therapy, n=15; interventional/surgical procedure, n=6). In 12 patients with a new clinically significant extracardiac finding, 6 (50%) experienced a change in care (medical therapy, n=4; palliative care, n=2).
conclusionsCMR imaging identifies new clinically significant cardiac and noncardiac findings in half of patients with recent ESUS. Advanced cardiovascular screening should be considered in patients with ESUS. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04555538.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.