Search

Background: A proportion of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source have silent atrial fibrillation (AF) or develop AF after the initial evaluation. Better understanding of the risk for development of AF is critical to implement optimal monitoring strategies with the goal of preventing recurrent stroke attributable to underlying AF. The RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) provides an opportunity to assess predictors for developing AF and associated recurrent stroke., Methods: RE-SPECT ESUS was a randomized, controlled trial (564 sites, 42 countries) assessing dabigatran versus aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Of 5390 patients enrolled and followed for a median of 19 months, 403 (7.5%) were found to develop AF reported as an adverse event or using cardiac monitoring per standard clinical care. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to define predictors of AF., Results: In the multivariable model, older age (odds ratio for 10-year increase, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.78-2.23]; P <0.001), hypertension (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.03-1.79]; P =0.0304), diabetes (odds ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96]; P =0.022), and body mass index (odds ratio for 5-U increase, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.16-1.43]; P <0.001) were independent predictors of AF during the study. In a sensitivity analysis restricted to 1117 patients with baseline NT-proBNP (N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide) measurements, only older age and higher NT-proBNP were significant independent predictors of AF. Performance of several published predictive models was assessed, including HAVOC (AF risk score based on hypertension, age ≥75 years, valvular heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, obesity, congestive heart failure, and coronary artery disease) and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (stroke risk score based on congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years [doubled], diabetes, previous stroke, transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism [doubled], vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category [female]) scores, and higher scores were associated with higher rates of developing AF., Conclusions: Besides age, the most important variable, several other factors, including hypertension, higher body mass index, and lack of diabetes, are independent predictors of AF after embolic stroke of undetermined source. When baseline NT-proBNP was available, only older age and elevation of this biomarker were predictive of subsequent AF. Understanding who is at higher risk of developing AF will assist in identifying patients who may benefit from more intense, long-term cardiac monitoring. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Background and Purpose: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) may increase the risk of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Guidelines suggest anticoagulation may be more effective than antiplatelets in preventing stroke in patients with ESUS and PFO when interventional closure is not performed., Methods: Patients with ESUS randomized to dabigatran (150/110 mg BID) or aspirin (100 mg QD) from the RE-SPECT ESUS study (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) were included. The rate of recurrent stroke (primary end point) and ischemic stroke was reported for patients with and without baseline PFO. A meta-analysis comparing the effects of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy on ischemic stroke in patients with PFO was updated to include RE-SPECT ESUS., Results: PFO was present in 680 of 5388 (12.6%) patients with documented PFO status. The risk of recurrent stroke with dabigatran versus aspirin was similar in patients with and without PFO ( P for interaction, 0.8290). In patients with PFO, the meta-analysis found no statistically significant difference between anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14]) for ischemic stroke., Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to recommend anticoagulation over antiplatelet therapy for patients with ESUS and a PFO. More data are needed to guide antithrombotic therapy in this population. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Background and Purpose- The RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) tested the hypothesis that dabigatran would be superior to aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. This exploratory subgroup analysis investigates the impact of age, renal function (both predefined), and dabigatran dose (post hoc) on the rates of recurrent stroke and major bleeding. Methods- RE-SPECT ESUS was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of dabigatran 150 or 110 mg (for patients aged ≥75 years and/or with creatinine clearance 30 to <50 mL/minute) twice daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. Results- The trial, which enrolled 5390 patients from December 2014 to January 2018, did not demonstrate superiority of dabigatran versus aspirin for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. However, among the population qualifying for the lower dabigatran dose, the rate of recurrent stroke was reduced with dabigatran versus aspirin (7.4% versus 13.0%; hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.39-0.82]; interaction P =0.01). This was driven mainly by the subgroup aged ≥75 years (7.8% versus 12.4%; hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43-0.94]; interaction P =0.10). Stroke rates tended to be lower with dabigatran versus aspirin with declining renal function. Risks for major bleeding were similar between treatments, irrespective of renal function, but with a trend for lower bleeding rates with dabigatran versus aspirin in older patients. Conclusions- In subgroup analyses of RE-SPECT ESUS, dabigatran reduced the rate of recurrent stroke compared with aspirin in patients qualifying for the lower dose of dabigatran. These results are hypothesis-generating. Aspirin remains the standard antithrombotic treatment for patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Background and Purpose- Ischemic stroke (IS) secondary to atrial fibrillation (AF) is largely preventable with the use of anticoagulation. We sought to identify race-ethnicity and sex disparities with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), aspirin, and warfarin in IS patients with AF and to identify temporal trends in the utilization of these medications. Methods- The FLiPER-AF Stroke Study (Florida Puerto Rico Atrial Fibrillation) included 24 040 IS cases enrolled in the Florida-Puerto Rico Collaboration to Reduce Stroke Registry from 2010 to 2016. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate the effect of race-ethnicity and sex on utilization of DOACs, aspirin, and warfarin for stroke prevention in AF after adjustment for sociodemographic, hospital, and clinical factors. Results- Among 24 040 IS cases, 54% were women and 10% black, 12% FL-Hispanics, 4% PR-Hispanic, and 74% whites. From 2010 to 2016, DOAC use increased from 0% to 36%, warfarin use decreased from 51% to 17%, and aspirin use remained relatively stable (42%-40%). After adjustment, blacks had higher odds of warfarin (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.40) prescription at discharge compared with whites. Men had higher rates of aspirin (42.1% versus 38.8%), warfarin (33.6% versus 28.9%), and DOAC (21.3% versus 19.3%) use compared with women. After adjustment, women had lower odds of being discharged on aspirin (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98) or warfarin (odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99). There was no sex difference in use of DOACs. Conclusions- Our study confirmed the increasing use of DOACs, downtrending use of warfarin, whereas aspirin use remained similar over the years. There are sex and race-ethnicity disparities in anticoagulation use in IS patients with AF. It is critical to understand underlying drivers of these disparities to develop better practice strategies for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03627806.

Aims: There is debate on whether the beneficial effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is attenuated in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). We assess whether any ICD benefit differs between patients with NICM and those with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), using data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial., Methods and Results: We performed a post hoc analysis using WARCEF (N = 2293; ICM, n = 991 vs. NICM, n = 1302), where participants received optimal medical treatment. We developed stratified propensity scores for having an ICD at baseline using 41 demographic and clinical variables and created 1:2 propensity-matched cohorts separately for ICM patients with ICD (N = 223 with ICD; N = 446 matched) and NICM patients (N = 195 with ICD; N = 390 matched). We constructed a Cox proportional hazards model to assess the effect of ICD status on mortality for patients with ICM and those with NICM and tested the interaction between ICD status and aetiology of heart failure. During mean follow-up of 3.5 ± 1.8 years, 527 patients died. The presence of ICD was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death among those with ICM (hazard ratio: 0.640; 95% confidence interval: 0.448 to 0.915; P = 0.015) but not among those with NICM (hazard ratio: 0.984; 95% confidence interval: 0.641 to 1.509; P = 0.941). There was weak evidence of interaction between ICD status and the aetiology of heart failure (P = 0.131)., Conclusions: The presence of ICD is associated with a survival benefit in patients with ICM but not in those with NICM., (© 2019 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Left atrium (LA) dilation is associated with adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Blood stasis, thrombus formation and atrial fibrillation may occur, especially in heart failure (HF) patients. It is not known whether preventive antithrombotic treatment may decrease the incidence of CV events in HF patients with LA enlargement. We investigated the relationship between LA enlargement and CV outcomes in HF patients and the effect of different antithrombotic treatments., Methods and Results: Two-dimensional echocardiography with LA volume index (LAVi) measurement was performed in 1148 patients with systolic HF from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial. Patients were randomized to warfarin or aspirin and followed for 3.4 ± 1.7 years. While the primary aim of the trial was a composite of ischaemic stroke, death, and intracerebral haemorrhage, the present report focuses on the individual CV events, whose incidence was compared across different LAVi and treatment subgroups. After adjustment for demographics and clinical covariates, moderate or severe LA enlargement was significantly associated with total death (hazard ratio 1.6 and 2.7, respectively), CV death (HR 1.7 and 3.3), and HF hospitalization (HR 2.3 and 2.6) but not myocardial infarction (HR 1.0 and 1.4) or ischaemic stroke (1.1 and 1.5). The increased risk was observed in both patients treated with warfarin or aspirin. In warfarin-treated patients, a time in therapeutic range >60% was associated with lower event rates, and an interaction between LAVi and time in therapeutic range was observed for death (P = 0.034)., Conclusions: In patients with systolic HF, moderate or severe LA enlargement is associated with death and HF hospitalization despite treatment with antithrombotic medications. The possibility that achieving a more consistent therapeutic level of anticoagulation may decrease the risk of death requires further investigation., (© 2018 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether aspirin increases heart failure (HF) hospitalization or death in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)., Background: Because of its cyclooxygenase inhibiting properties, aspirin has been postulated to increase HF events in patients treated with ACE inhibitors or ARBs. However, no large randomized trial has addressed the clinical relevance of this issue., Methods: We compared aspirin and warfarin for HF events (hospitalization, death, or both) in the 2,305 patients enrolled in the WARCEF (Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction) trial (98.6% on ACE inhibitor or ARB treatment), using conventional Cox models for time to first event (489 events). In addition, to examine multiple HF hospitalizations, we used 2 extended Cox models, a conditional model and a total time marginal model, in time to recurrent event analyses (1,078 events)., Results: After adjustment for baseline covariates, aspirin- and warfarin-treated patients did not differ in time to first HF event (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.04; p = 0.117) or first hospitalization alone (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 1.06; p = 0.168). The extended Cox models also found no significant differences in all HF events or in HF hospitalizations alone after adjustment for covariates., Conclusions: Among patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction in the WARCEF trial, there was no significant difference in risk of HF events between the aspirin and warfarin-treated patients. (Warfarin Versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial [WARCEF]; NCT00041938)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: In heart failure (HF), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is inversely associated with mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. Its relationship with stroke is controversial, as is the effect of antithrombotic treatment. We studied the relationship of LVEF with stroke and cardiovascular events in patients with HF and the effect of different antithrombotic treatments., Methods: In the Warfarin Versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial, 2305 patients with systolic HF (LVEF≤35%) and sinus rhythm were randomized to warfarin or aspirin and followed for 3.5±1.8 years. Although no differences between treatments were observed on primary outcome (death, stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage), warfarin decreased the stroke risk. The present report compares the incidence of stroke and cardiovascular events across different LVEF and treatment subgroups., Results: Baseline LVEF was inversely and linearly associated with primary outcome, mortality and its components (sudden and cardiovascular death), and HF hospitalization, but not myocardial infarction. A relationship with stroke was only observed for LVEF of <15% (incidence rates: 2.04 versus 0.95/100 patient-years; P=0.009), which more than doubled the adjusted stroke risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.125; 95% CI, 1.182-3.818; P=0.012). In warfarin-treated patients, each 5% LVEF decrement significantly increased the stroke risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.346; 95% CI, 1.044-1.737; P=0.022; P value for interaction=0.04)., Conclusions: In patients with systolic HF and sinus rhythm, LVEF is inversely associated with death and its components, whereas an association with stroke exists for very low LVEF values. An interaction with warfarin treatment on stroke risk may exist., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00041938., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Heart failure (HF) patients have a high incidence of new-onset AF. Given the adverse prognostic influence of AF in HF, identifying patients at high risk of developing AF is important., Methods and results: The incidence and factors associated with new-onset AF were investigated in patients in sinus rhythm with reduced LVEF enrolled in the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial. Analyses involved clinical factors alone (n=2,219), and clinical plus echocardiographic findings (n=1,125). During 3.5±1.8 years of follow-up, 212 patients (9.6% of total cohort) developed AF. In both samples, new-onset AF was associated with age, male sex, White race, and IHD. Among echocardiographic variables, only LAD predicted AF. On multivariate Cox modeling, age (HR, 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00-1.03, P=0.008), IHD (HR, 1.37; 95% CI: 1.02-1.84, P=0.036) and LAD (HR, 1.48; 95% CI: 1.15-1.91, P=0.003) remained associated with AF onset. Patients with IHD, LAD>4.5 cm and age>50 years had a 2.5-fold higher risk of AF than patients without any of these characteristics (HR, 2.52; 95% CI: 1.72-3.69, P<0.0001)., Conclusions: Age, IHD and LAD independently predict new-onset AF in HF patients in sinus rhythm, at younger age and smaller LAD than generally believed. This information may be useful to risk-stratify HF patients for AF development, allowing close monitoring and possibly early detection. (Circ J 2016; 80: 619-626).

Rationale: Cryptogenic ischemic strokes constitute 20-30% of ischemic strokes, the majority of which are embolic strokes of undetermined source. The standard preventive treatment in these patients is usually acetylsalicylic acid., Aim: The Randomized, double-blind, Evaluation in secondary Stroke Prevention comparing the EfficaCy and safety of the oral Thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate vs. acetylsalicylic acid in patients with Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (RE-SPECT ESUS) is designed to determine whether the oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran, taken within three-months after embolic stroke of undetermined source, is superior to acetylsalicylic acid for prevention of recurrent stroke and to characterize the safety of dabigatran in this setting., Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial in approximately 6000 patients and 550 centers with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Subjects are randomized to dabigatran or acetylsalicylic acid and treated for an expected minimum of six-months and up to approximately three-years. It is an event-driven trial aiming for 353 adjudicated primary outcome events., Study Outcomes: The primary efficacy outcome is time to first recurrent stroke (ischemic, hemorrhagic, or unspecified). Key secondary outcomes are time to first ischemic stroke and time to first occurrence in the composite outcome of nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular death. The primary safety outcome is major hemorrhage, including symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage., Discussion: Acetylsalicylic acid is the most common antithrombotic given to patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source to reduce recurrence risk. This trial will determine whether anticoagulation with dabigatran is more effective than acetylsalicylic acid, and acceptably safe., (© 2015 World Stroke Organization.)

We sought to assess the performance of existing bleeding risk scores, such as the Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol Concomitantly (HAS-BLED) score or the Outpatient Bleeding Risk Index (OBRI), in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in sinus rhythm (SR) treated with warfarin or aspirin. We calculated HAS-BLED and OBRI risk scores for 2,305 patients with HFrEF in SR enrolled in the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial. Proportional hazards models were used to test whether each score predicted major bleeding, and comparison of different risk scores was performed using Harell C-statistic and net reclassification improvement index. For the warfarin arm, both scores predicted bleeding risk, with OBRI having significantly greater C-statistic (0.72 vs 0.61; p = 0.03) compared to HAS-BLED, although the net reclassification improvement for comparing OBRI to HAS-BLED was not significant (0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.18 to 0.37). Performance of the OBRI and HAS-BLED risk scores was similar for the aspirin arm. For participants with OBRI scores of 0 to 1, warfarin compared with aspirin reduced ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.98, p = 0.042) without significantly increasing major bleeding (HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.30, p = 0.51). For those with OBRI score of ≥2, there was a trend for reduced ischemic stroke with warfarin compared to aspirin (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.15, p = 0.12), but major bleeding was increased (HR 4.04, 95% CI 1.99 to 8.22, p <0.001). In conclusion, existing bleeding risk scores can identify bleeding risk in patients with HFrEF in SR and could be tested for potentially identifying patients with a favorable risk/benefit profile for antithrombotic therapy with warfarin., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between time in the therapeutic range (TTR) and clinical outcomes in heart failure patients in sinus rhythm treated with warfarin., Methods and Results: We used data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial to assess the relationship of TTR with the WARCEF primary outcome (ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death), with death alone, ischemic stroke alone, major hemorrhage alone, and net clinical benefit (primary outcome and major hemorrhage combined). Multivariable Cox models were used to examine how the event risk changed with TTR and to compare the high TTR, low TTR, and aspirin-treated patients, with TTR being treated as a time-dependent covariate. A total of 2217 patients were included in the analyses; among whom 1067 were randomized to warfarin and 1150 were randomized to aspirin. The median (interquartile range) follow-up duration was 3.6 (2.0-5.0) years. Mean (±SD) age was 61±11.3 years, with 80% being men. The mean (±SD) TTR was 57% (±28.5%). Increasing TTR was significantly associated with reduction in primary outcome (adjusted P<0.001), death alone (adjusted P=0.001), and improved net clinical benefit (adjusted P<0.001). A similar trend was observed for the other 2 outcomes, but significance was not reached (adjusted P=0.082 for ischemic stroke and adjusted P=0.109 for major hemorrhage)., Conclusions: In patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm, increasing TTR is associated with better outcome and improved net clinical benefit. Patients in whom good quality anticoagulation can be achieved may benefit from the use of anticoagulants., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00041938., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

We sought to determine whether cognitive function in stable outpatients with heart failure (HF) is affected by HF severity. A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis was performed using data from 2, 043 outpatients with systolic HF and without prior stroke enrolled in the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) Trial. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between cognitive function measured using the Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE) and markers of HF severity (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF], New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class, and 6-minute walk distance). The mean (SD) for the MMSE was 28.6 (2.0), with 64 (3.1%) of the 2,043 patients meeting the cut-off of MMSE <24 that indicates need for further evaluation of cognitive impairment. After adjustment for demographic and clinical covariates, 6-minute walk distance (β-coefficient 0.002, p<0.0001), but not LVEF or NYHA functional class, was independently associated with the MMSE as a continuous measure. Age, education, smoking status, body mass index, and hemoglobin level were also independently associated with the MMSE. In conclusion, six-minute walk distance, but not LVEF or NYHA functional class, was an important predictor of cognitive function in ambulatory patients with systolic heart failure.

Background and Purpose: WARCEF randomized 2,305 patients in sinus rhythm with ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 35% to warfarin (INR 2.0-3.5) or aspirin 325 mg. Warfarin reduced the incident ischemic stroke (IIS) hazard rate by 48% over aspirin in a secondary analysis. The IIS rate in heart failure (HF) is too low to warrant routine anticoagulation but epidemiologic studies show that prior stroke increases the stroke risk in HF. In this study, we explore IIS rates in WARCEF patients with and without baseline stroke to look for risk factors for IIS and determine if a subgroup with an IIS rate high enough to give a clinically relevant stroke risk reduction can be identified., Methods: We compared potential stroke risk factors between patients with baseline stroke and those without using the exact conditional score test for Poisson variables. We looked for risk factors for IIS, by comparing IIS rates between different risk factors. For EF we tried cut-off points of 10, 15 and 20%. The cut-off point 15% was used as it was the highest EF that was associated with a significant increase in IIS rate. IIS and EF strata were balanced as to warfarin/aspirin assignment by the stratified randomized design. A multiple Poisson regression examined the simultaneous effects of all risk factors on IIS rate. IIS rates per hundred patient years (/100 PY) were calculated in patient groups with significant risk factors. Missing values were assigned the modal value., Results: Twenty of 248 (8.1%) patients with baseline stroke and 64 of 2,048 (3.1%) without had IIS. IIS rate in patients with baseline stroke (2.37/100 PY) was greater than patients without (0.89/100 PY) (rate ratio 2.68, p < 0.001). Fourteen of 219 (6.4%) patients with ejection fraction (EF) <15% and 70 of 2,079 (3.4%) with EF ≥ 15% had IIS. In the multiple regression analysis stroke at baseline (p < 0.001) and EF <15% vs. ≥ 15% (p = 0.005) remained significant predictors of IIS. IIS rate was 2.04/100 PY in patients with EF <15% and 0.95/100 PY in patients with EF ≥ 15% (p = 0.009). IIS rate in patients with baseline stroke and reduced EF was 5.88/100 PY with EF <15% decreasing to 2.62/100 PY with EF <30%., Conclusions: In a WARCEF exploratory analysis, prior stroke and EF <15% were risk factors for IIS. Further research is needed to determine if a clinically relevant stroke risk reduction is obtainable with warfarin in HF patients with prior stroke and reduced EF., (© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: The Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction (WARCEF) trial found no difference in the primary outcome between warfarin and aspirin in 2305 patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in sinus rhythm. However, it is unknown whether any subgroups benefit from warfarin or aspirin., Methods and Results: We used a Cox model stepwise selection procedure to identify subgroups that may benefit from warfarin or aspirin on the WARCEF primary outcome. A secondary analysis added major hemorrhage to the outcome. The primary efficacy outcome was time to the first to occur of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death. Only age group was a significant treatment effect modifier (P for interaction, 0.003). Younger patients benefited from warfarin over aspirin on the primary outcome (4.81 versus 6.76 events per 100 patient-years: hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.84; P=0.001). In older patients, therapies did not differ (9.91 versus 9.01 events per 100 patient-years: hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.35; P=0.44). With major hemorrhage added, in younger patients the event rate remained lower for warfarin than aspirin (5.41 versus 7.25 per 100 patient-years: hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.89; P=0.005), but in older patients it became significantly higher for warfarin (11.80 versus 9.35 per 100 patient-years: hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.53; P=0.03)., Conclusions: In patients <60 years, warfarin improved outcomes over aspirin with or without inclusion of major hemorrhage. In patients ≥60 years, there was no treatment difference, but the aspirin group had significantly better outcomes when major hemorrhage was included.

Background: Several case control studies have reported an increased risk of cardiovascular events following discontinuation of antiplatelet agents in high-risk patients. We therefore sought to investigate the risk of recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events following discontinuation of antiplatelet study medication in the Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes (PRoFESS) trial, a large randomized secondary stroke prevention study., Methods: The recurrent stroke and cardiovascular event rates following discontinuation of aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA + ERDP) or clopidogrel were compared to the event rates in the on-treatment populations (patients who had discontinued their antiplatelet medication due to an outcome event were kept in the on-treatment population in order not to underestimate the on-treatment stroke rate)., Results: In 7,212 treated ASA + ERDP patients, the stroke incidence rate for the on-treatment group was 729 strokes with an average exposure of 17,048 person-years (0.12 per 1,000 person-days). For 7,864 treated clopidogrel patients, the stroke incidence rate for the on-treatment group was 737 strokes with an average exposure of 18,715 person-years (0.11 per 1,000 person-days). ASA + ERDP was discontinued in 2,843 patients (in 57.7% due to an adverse event, 28.2% noncompliance, 1.4% loss to follow-up, 4.5% withdrawal of consent and 8.1% other/nonspecified reasons) and clopidogrel was permanently discontinued in 2,176 patients (49.0% due to an adverse event, 34.2% noncompliance, 1.8% loss to follow-up, 5.3% withdrawal of consent and 9.7% other/nonspecified reasons). Within 30 days, a recurrent stroke occurred in 31 patients (0.37 per 1,000 person-days) after discontinuation of ASA + ERDP and in 15 patients (0.24 per 1,000 person-days) after discontinuation of clopidogrel. This corresponds to an absolute excess risk of 0.77% within 30 days after discontinuation of ASA + ERDP and 0.40% within 30 days after discontinuation of clopidogrel compared with the on-treatment study populations. A combined vascular endpoint (stroke, myocardial infarction, vascular death) occurred in 68 patients (0.82 per 1,000 person-days) within 30 days after discontinuation of ASA + ERDP and in 47 patients (0.75 per 1,000 person-days) within 30 days after discontinuation of clopidogrel. This corresponds to an absolute excess risk of 2.02% within 30 days after discontinuation of ASA + ERDP and 1.83% within 30 days after discontinuation of clopidogrel compared with the on-treatment study populations., Conclusion: Discontinuation of antiplatelet medication after ischemic stroke should be advocated only when the risk and severity of bleeding clearly outweigh the risk of cardiovascular events., (Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: The Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction trial found no difference between warfarin and aspirin in patients with low ejection fraction in sinus rhythm for the primary outcome: first to occur of 84 incident ischemic strokes (IIS), 7 intracerebral hemorrhages or 531 deaths. Prespecified secondary analysis showed a 48% hazard ratio reduction (p = 0.005) for warfarin in IIS. Cardioembolism is likely the main pathogenesis of stroke in heart failure. We examined the IIS benefit for warfarin in more detail in post hoc secondary analyses., Methods: We subtyped IIS into definite, possible and noncardioembolic using the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation method. Statistical tests, stratified by prior ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, were the conditional binomial for independent Poisson variables for rates, the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test for stroke subtype and the van Elteren test for modified Rankin Score (mRS) and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) distributions, and an exact test for proportions., Results: Twenty-nine of 1,142 warfarin and 55 of 1,163 aspirin patients had IIS. The warfarin IIS rate (0.727/100 patient-years, PY) was lower than for aspirin (1.36/100 PY, p = 0.003). Definite cardioembolic IIS was less frequent on warfarin than aspirin (0.22 vs. 0.55/100 PY, p = 0.012). Possible cardioembolic IIS tended to be less frequent on warfarin than aspirin (0.37 vs. 0.67/100 PY, p = 0.063) but noncardioembolic IIS showed no difference: 5 (0.12/100 PY) versus 6 (0.15/100 PY, p = 0.768). Among patients experiencing IIS, there were no differences by treatment arm in fatal IIS, baseline mRS, mRS 90 days after IIS, and change from baseline to post-IIS mRS. The warfarin arm showed a trend to a lower proportion of severe nonfatal IIS [mRS 3-5; 3/23 (13.0%) vs. 16/48 (33.3%), p = 0.086]. There was no difference in NIHSS at the time of stroke (p = 0.825) or in post-IIS mRS (p = 0.948) between cardioembolic, possible cardioembolic and noncardioembolic stroke including both warfarin and aspirin groups., Conclusions: The observed benefits in the reduction of IIS for warfarin compared to aspirin are most significant for cardioembolic IIS among patients with low ejection fraction in sinus rhythm. This is supported by trends to lower frequencies of severe IIS and possible cardioembolic IIS in patients on warfarin compared to aspirin., (Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: It is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm., Methods: We designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause., Results: The rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P=0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P=0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P=0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P=0.82)., Conclusions: Among patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; WARCEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00041938.).

Background: Recurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens--aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA-ERDP) versus clopidogrel., Methods: In this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned., Results: A total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA-ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients (13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA-ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA-ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA-ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11)., Conclusions: The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA-ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.), (2008 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Background and Purpose: We performed a combination of prespecified and exploratory subgroup analyses to detect any treatment differences among various baseline subgroups in the Warfarin-Aspirin Recurrent Stroke Study (WARSS) cohort., Methods: The WARSS compared the efficacy of adjusted-dose warfarin (INR 1.4-2.8) to aspirin (325 mg/day) for recurrent ischemic stroke or death within 2 years. The effect of warfarin and aspirin was compared among prespecified and exploratory subgroups with respect to sociodemographic and vascular risk factors, stroke subtype, arterial territory, and infarct topography. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals comparing warfarin to aspirin were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. Differences in hazard ratios were tested using interaction terms., Results: No treatment differences between warfarin and aspirin were found across multiple prespecified subgroups. In a multivariate model, warfarin was associated with greater hazard among patients with moderate stroke severity (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.005-2.64, p = 0.047) and a greater benefit among those with posterior circulation location without brainstem infarction (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.88, p = 0.013). In post-hoc analyses of the cryptogenic subgroup, warfarin was associated with worse outcomes among patients with moderate stroke severity and better outcomes among those without baseline hypertension or with posterior circulation infarcts sparing the brainstem., Conclusions: In the WARSS, the majority of subgroup analyses showed no benefit of warfarin over aspirin. Warfarin benefit was limited to brainstem-sparing posterior circulation infarcts and select cryptogenic stroke subgroups. Pending future clinical trial evidence to the contrary, antiplatelets are recommended for survivors of noncardioembolic stroke., (Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: To assess the efficacy of aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole compared with aspirin alone for the prevention of recurrent stroke among high-risk groups., Design: A post hoc analysis was conducted using data from the European Stroke Prevention Study 2. Rates of annual strokes and vascular events were determined for the aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole group (n = 1650) and the aspirin-only group (n = 1649), and were stratified by risk subgroup and univariate risk factors. Stroke models from the Framingham Study and the Stroke Prognostic Instrument II were applied to subjects in the European Stroke Prevention Study 2 to categorize patients into risk groups., Results: Compared with aspirin alone, aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole demonstrated a more pronounced efficacy in reducing the risk for stroke and vascular events among patients younger than 70 years; those with hypertension, prior stroke, or transient ischemic attack; current smokers; and those with any prior cardiovascular disease. Relative hazard reductions favored the combination of aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole, and were greatest for the high-risk Framingham Study group and the moderate-risk Stroke Prognostic Instrument II subgroup., Conclusion: Aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole is more effective than aspirin alone at preventing stroke, and the difference in efficacy increases in higher-risk patients.

Background: Valvular strands are associated with ischemic stroke. The recurrent rate of adverse events in stroke patients with valvular strands has not been defined and, importantly, there are no randomized studies to evaluate efficacy of antithrombotic therapies in these patients., Methods: Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke Study (PICSS) enrolled 630 stroke patients, of whom 312 (49.5%) were randomized to warfarin and 318 (50.5%) were randomized to aspirin; 265 patients experienced cryptogenic stroke and 365 experienced stroke with known subtypes. Endpoints were recurrent ischemic stroke or death from any cause. All transesophageal echocardiography studies were blindly, centrally analyzed and all endpoints were blindly adjudicated., Results: Overall, of 619 studies analyzed, valvular strands were present in 39.4% of the patients (244/619), 5.8% (36/619) on the aortic valve and 27.8% (172/619) on the mitral valve, and 5.8% (36/619) on both valves. In an intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in the time to primary endpoints between patients with and without strands in the overall population (P=0.82; hazard ratio: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.57; 2-year event rates: 16.4% versus 15.5%). Among the patients with strands, there was no significant difference in the time to primary endpoints between those treated with warfarin or aspirin (P=0.21; hazard ratio: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.36 to 1.26; 2-year event rates: 13.5% versus 19.6%)., Conclusions: While on medical therapy, valvular strands do not significantly increase recurrent adverse event rates in patients with ischemic stroke. Furthermore, the study does not provide evidence to support an advantage of warfarin or aspirin for this purpose.

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to assess the mechanism responsible for increased stroke risk in patients with atrial septal aneurysm (SA) and patent foramen ovale (PFO), and to determine the efficacy of medical therapy for preventing stroke recurrence or death., Background: Atrial septal aneurysm and PFO are associated with stroke. However, the mechanism for this association is undefined, and the efficacy of medical therapy has not been investigated in a randomized fashion., Methods: The Patent foramen ovale In Cryptogenic Stroke Study (PICSS) evaluated transesophageal echocardiography findings in patients enrolled in the Warfarin-Aspirin Recurrent Stroke Study, a randomized double-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of warfarin compared with aspirin., Results: Large PFO and prominent eustachian valve (EV) or right atrial (RA) filamentous strands were found more frequently in patients with SA compared with those without SA (37.7% vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001 and 59.4% vs. 43.1%, p = 0.02). Patients with SA and PFO had no significant difference in time to recurrent stroke or death compared with those having neither (hazard ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 2.38, p = 0.84; two-year event rates 15.9% vs. 14.5%). Patients with SA, PFO, and RA anatomy predisposing to paradoxical embolization also had no difference compared with those without these findings (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.47, p = 0.71; two-year event rates 18.2% vs. 14.2%). There was no significant difference in time to recurrent stroke or death between the patients treated with warfarin or aspirin (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.47, p = 1.0; two-year event rates 16.0% vs. 15.8%)., Conclusions: Atrial septal aneurysm is associated with the presence of large PFO and prominent EV or RA filamentous strands. On medical therapy, patients with SA and PFO did not experience increased risk of adverse events, and there was no difference between treatment results for warfarin and for aspirin.

Background We sought to determine recurrent stroke predictors among patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source (ESUS). Methods and Results We applied Cox proportional hazards models to identify clinical features associated with recurrent stroke among participants enrolled in RE-SPECT ESUS (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) trial, an international clinical trial evaluating dabigatran versus aspirin for patients with ESUS. During a median follow-up of 19 months, 384 of 5390 participants had recurrent stroke (annual rate, 4.5%). Multivariable models revealed that stroke or transient ischemic attack before the index event (hazard ratio [HR], 2.27 [95% CI, 1.83-2.82]), creatinine clearance

ObjectivesThis study sought to characterize cognitive decline (CD) over time and its predictors in patients with systolic heart failure (HF).BackgroundDespite the high prevalence of CD and its impact on mortality, predictors of CD in HF have not been established.MethodsThis study investigated CD in the WARCEF (Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, which performed yearly Mini-Mental State Examinations (MMSE) (higher scores indicate better cognitive function; e.g., normal score: 24 or higher). A longitudinal time-varying analysis was performed among pertinent covariates, including baseline MMSE and MMSE scores during follow-up, analyzed both as a continuous variable and a 2-point decrease. To account for a loss to follow-up, data at the baseline and at the 12-month visit were analyzed separately (sensitivity analysis).ResultsA total of 1,846 patients were included. In linear regression, MMSE decrease was independently associated with higher baseline MMSE score (p

Previous studies in patients with atrial fibrillation showed that a history of heart failure (HF) could negatively impact anticoagulation quality, as measured by the average time in therapeutic range (TTR). Whether additional markers of HF severity are associated with TTR has not been investigated thoroughly. We aimed to examine the potential role of HF severity in the quality of warfarin control in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin in Reduced Cardiac Ejection Fraction Trial were used to investigate the association between TTR and HF severity. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association of markers of HF severity, including New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, Minnesota Living with HF (MLWHF) score, and frequency of HF hospitalization, with TTR ≥70% (high TTR). We included 1,067 participants (high TTR, N = 413; low TTR, N = 654) in the analysis. In unadjusted analysis, patients with a high TTR were older and less likely to have had strokes or receive other antiplatelet agents. Those patients also had lower NYHA class, better MLWHF scores, greater 6-minute walk distance, and lower frequency of HF hospitalizations. Multivariable analysis showed that NYHA class III and/or IV (Odds ratio [OR] 0.68 [95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.49 to 0.94]), each 10-point increase in MLWHF score (i.e., worse health-related quality of life) (OR 0.92 [0.86 to 0.99]), and higher number of HF hospitalization per year (OR0.45 [0.30 to 0.67]) were associated with decreased likelihood of having high TTR. In HF patients with systolic dysfunction, NYHA class III and/or IV, poor health-related quality of life, and a higher rate of HF hospitalization were independently associated with suboptimal quality of warfarin anticoagulation control. These results affirm the need to assess the new approaches, such as direct oral anticoagulants, to prevent thromboembolism in this patient population.

AimsThe aim of this study was to determine whether the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score can predict adverse outcomes such as death, ischaemic stroke, and major haemorrhage, in patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm.Methods and resultsCHA2 DS2 -VASc scores were calculated for 1101 patients randomized to warfarin and 1123 patients randomized to aspirin. Adverse outcomes were defined as death or ischaemic stroke, death alone, ischaemic stroke alone, and major haemorrhage. Using proportional hazards models, we found that each 1-point increase in the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was associated with increased hazard of death or ischaemic stroke events [hazard ratio (HR) for the warfarin arm = 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.30, P < 0.001; for aspirin, HR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.11-1.29, P < 0.001]. Similar increased hazards for higher CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores were observed for death alone, ischaemic stroke alone, and major haemorrhage. Overall performance of the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was assessed using c-statistics for full models containing the risk score, treatment assignment, and score-treatment interaction, with the c-statistics for the full models ranging from 0.57 for death to 0.68 for major haemorrhage.ConclusionsThe CHA2 DS2 -VASc score predicted adverse outcomes in patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm, with modest prediction accuracy.

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine whether the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score can predict adverse outcomes such as death, ischaemic stroke, and major haemorrhage, in patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm.Methods and Results: CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores were calculated for 1101 patients randomized to warfarin and 1123 patients randomized to aspirin. Adverse outcomes were defined as death or ischaemic stroke, death alone, ischaemic stroke alone, and major haemorrhage. Using proportional hazards models, we found that each 1-point increase in the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was associated with increased hazard of death or ischaemic stroke events [hazard ratio (HR) for the warfarin arm = 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.30, P < 0.001; for aspirin, HR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.11-1.29, P < 0.001]. Similar increased hazards for higher CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores were observed for death alone, ischaemic stroke alone, and major haemorrhage. Overall performance of the CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was assessed using c-statistics for full models containing the risk score, treatment assignment, and score-treatment interaction, with the c-statistics for the full models ranging from 0.57 for death to 0.68 for major haemorrhage.Conclusions: The CHA2 DS2 -VASc score predicted adverse outcomes in patients with systolic heart failure in sinus rhythm, with modest prediction accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Cerebrovascular Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaborative Group was formed to obtain and analyze individual patient data from the major randomized trials of common antiplatelet regimens after cerebral ischemia. Although the risk of stroke can be reduced by antiplatelet drugs, there continues to be uncertainty about the balance of risk and benefits of different antiplatelet regimens for an individual patient. Aims Our aim is to provide clinicians with a thorough evidence-based answer on these therapeutic alternatives. Methods We have identified six large randomized trials and plan to meta-analyze the data on an individual patient level. In total, these trials have enrolled 46 948 patients with cerebral ischemia. Uniquely, the Cerebrovascular Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaborative Group has secured access to the individual data of all of these trials, with the participation of key investigators and pharmaceutical companies. Our principal objective includes deriving a reliable estimate of the efficacy of different antiplatelet regimens on key outcomes including serious vascular events, major ischemic events, major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. Results We propose to redefine composite outcome events, if necessary, to achieve comparability. Further, we aim to build and validate prognostic models for the risk of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage and to build a decision model that may support evidence-based decision making about which antiplatelet regimen would be most effective in different risk groups of patients. Conclusions This paper outlines inclusion criteria, outcome measures, baseline characteristics, and planned statistical analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the treatment and prevention of ischemic stroke, which is a syndrome of multiple causes of disease and variable clinical manifestations. It mentions that the most common cause of ischemic stroke is the atherosclerosis of small and large arteries that supplies the brain. The article provides recommendations and suggestions to reduce or prevent brain infarction, minimizing stroke-related diseases.

Updates on antiplatelet therapy for stroke prevention. Second European Stroke Prevention Study; Efficacy in clinical trials; Evidence for efficacy of low-dose aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole; Recommended prescribing agents.

The article focuses on the 2011 update on the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) guidelines on secondary prevention and risk reduction for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic disease. The update includes the importance of administering cardiovascular medications that was able to prove its benefit in randomized clinical trials. Continuous practice of giving lower-dose aspirin for chronic therapy was also included in the update.