PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 2, 2026Stroke0 citations

Abstract DP154: The Association Between Comprehensive Evaluation in ESUS and Stroke Recurrence: A secondary analysis of the Cardiac Abnormalities in Stroke Prevention and risk of Recurrence Study

View Full Paper
FKFahad KhanCSChristoph StretzSLSkylar Lewis

Key Points

  • This study aims to evaluate the relationship between the thoroughness of neurodiagnostic testing and the recurrence of ischemic strokes in patients with ESUS.
  • Retrospective analysis of a multicenter observational cohort study involving 27 sites
  • Categorization of patients into three groups based on diagnostic workup completeness
  • Comparison of recurrent ischemic stroke rates using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models
  • Out of 2,281 patients, 30% were classified as ESUS-E, 15% as ESUS 2.0, and 55% as ESUS-NAW
  • The ESUS 2.0 group showed a significantly lower annualized recurrence rate of 1.98 per 100 person-years compared to ESUS-NAW (7.7) and ESUS-E (6.10)
  • Factors like cancer and non-stenosing atherosclerotic disease were identified as high-risk for recurrence within the ESUS-E group

Abstract

Background: Although the embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) construct was proposed as a unifying concept for embolic-appearing strokes without an identified cause, it includes patients with diverse and often unrecognized underlying mechanisms. This study investigates the differential rate of recurrent stroke according to the completeness of neurodiagnostic testing in a diverse multicenter cohort. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a multicenter observational cohort study (n=27 sites). Patients with ESUS were categorized into three groups: (1) established mechanism after further work up (ESUS-E), (2) patients who underwent a comprehensive diagnostic workup without an identified etiology (ESUS 2.0), and (3) no advanced workup (ESUS-NAW). The primary outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke was assessed by comparing ESUS 2.0 to both ESUS-E and ESUS-NAW groups using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Of the 2,281 patients included, 694 (30%) were classified as ESUS-E, 344 (15%) as ESUS 2.0, and 1,443 (55%) as ESUS-NAW. The ESUS 2.0 group had a significantly lower annualized recurrence rate (1.98 per 100 person-years) compared to both the ESUS-NAW group (7.7 per 100 person-years; aHR 0.27, 95% CI: 0.11–0.62; p=0.002) and the ESUS-E group (6.10 per 100 person-years; aHR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.15–0.85, p=0.020). Within the ESUS-E group, cancer (aHR 5.33; 95% CI: 2.09–13.63; p < 0.001) and non-stenosing atherosclerotic disease or arch atheroma (aHR 3.40; 95% CI: 1.18–9.83; p = 0.023) were associated with significantly increased risk of recurrence when compared to ESUS 2.0. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate a lower risk of recurrent stroke in patients classified as ESUS 2.0, diverging from the 5–6% annual recurrence rates observed in prior ESUS trials. These findings suggest that patients who receive comprehensive diagnostic evaluation without identification of a specific etiology have a lower risk of recurrent stroke, an important consideration for the design of future ESUS studies.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Khan et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6980fcfcc1c9540dea80ec53https://doi.org/10.1161/str.57.suppl_1.dp154
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper