The Usefulness of Outpatient Cardiac Telemetry in Patients with Cryptogenic Stroke.

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF), apart from non-stenotic supracardiac atherosclerosis and neoplastic disease, is the leading cause of cryptogenic stroke, including embolic stroke of un-determined source (ESUS). The aim of our study was to determine the prevalence of AF in ESUS patients based on 30-day telemetric heart rate monitoring initiated within three months after stroke onset. Another aim was to identify factors that increase the likelihood of detecting subsequent AF among ESUS patients. Material and Methods: patients with first-ever stroke classified as per the ESUS definition were eligible for this study. All patients underwent outpatient 30-day telemetric heart rate monitoring. Results: In the period between 2020 and 2022, 145 patients were included. The mean age of all qualified patients was 54; 40% of eligible patients were female. Six patients (4.14%), mostly male patients (4 vs. 2), were diagnosed with AF within the study period. In each case, the diagnosis related to a patient whose stroke occurred in the course of large vessel occlusion. Episodes of AF were detected between day 1 and 25 after starting ECG monitoring. Out of the analyzed parameters that increase the probability of, A.F.; only supraventricular extrasystoles proved to be an independent factor regarding an increased risk of AF [OR 1.046, CI 95% 1.016-1.071, p-value < 0.01]. Conclusions: The use of telemetry heart rhythm monitoring in an outpatient setting can detect AF in 4% of ESUS patients who have undergone prior diagnostic procedures for cardiogenic embolism. Supraventricular extrasystoles significantly increases the likelihood of AF detection in patients with ESUS within three months following stroke. Comorbid coronary artery disease, diabetes and hypertension, rather than a single-factor clinical burden, increase the likelihood of AF detection in older ESUS patients. ESUS in the course of large vessel occlusion is probably associated with an increased likelihood of cardiogenic embolism.

Severe degenerative aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction does not change adipokines serum levels.

BACKGROUND: The role of the adipokines in the pathogenesis of aortic stenosis (AS) is not well established. The aim was to evaluate the relationship between adipokines and clinical characteristics as well as echocardiographic indices and noninvasive markers of vascular remodeling in patients with severe AS with preserved ejection fraction (EF). METHODS: Sixty-five patients (F/M: 38/27; age: 68.3 ± 9.0 years; body mass index [BMI]: 29.6 ± 4.3 kg/m2) with severe AS with preserved EF: 33 patients with paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS (PLFLG AS) and 32 patients with normal flow high-gradient AS (NFHG AS) were prospectively enrolled into the study. Twenty-four subjects (F/M: 14/10; age: 65.4 ± 8.7 years; BMI: 29.6 ± 4.3 kg/m2) who matched as to age, sex, BMI and coronary artery disease (CAD) constituted the control group (CG). Clinical data and markers of vascular remodeling were related to the serum adipokines. RESULTS: There were no differences in the adipokines concentrations in the AS/CG. Patients with AS and coexisting CAD were characterized by decreased serum adiponectin (9.9 ± 5.5 vs. 12.7 ± 5.8 µg/mL, p = 0.040) and leptin (8.3 ± 7.8 vs. 21.6 ± 17.1 ng/mL, p < 0.001) levels compared to subjects without CAD. There were no differences in the serum adipokines concentrations between patients with PLFLG AS and NFHG AS. Systemic hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia or markers of vascular remodeling did not discriminate adipokines concentrations. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that age (F = 3.02; p = 0.015) and E/E' index (F = 0.87, p = 0.032) were independent predictors of the adiponectin level in the AS group. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of AS with preserved EF did not change the adipokine serum profile. Adipokines levels were modified by coexisting atherosclerosis but not the typical cardiovascular risk factors or the hemodynamic type of AS.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch and left ventricle systolic strain in patients with severe degenerative aortic stenosis, who are undergoing surgical valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is an independent predictor of post-operative mortality after aortic valve replacement (AVR), particularly when it is associated with a left ventricle (LV) dysfunction. Two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) could be useful in assessing LV function in patients with PPM. AIM: To evaluate the impact of PPM on myocardial multidirectional LV systolic strain in patients who are undergoing AVR for severe degenerative aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: Sixty-five patients (38 females, 27 males, age: 69.9 ± 9.1 years) with severe degenerative AS and preserved LV ejection fraction were enrolled into the study. Pre- and three-month postoperative 2D-STE was performed to assess LV peak systolic longitudinal strain (LV PSLS), circumferential strain, and LV rotation. The indexed prosthesis effective orifice area (iEOAprosth) was used to define PPM (≤ 0.65 cm2/m2), and it was used to distinguish the study groups: PPM (+) (n = 35) and PPM (-) (n = 30). RESULTS: A significant association of LV PSLS and interaction in the groups [PPM (+) vs. PPM (-)] and intervention (before vs. after AVR; p = 0.019) was observed - the lowest value of LV PSLS was in the PPM (+) group (-14.9 ± 3.5%) after AVR. A significant difference in the mean delta (before/after AVR) values of LV PSLS (0.7 ± 3.1% vs. -1.2 ± 3.6%; p = 0.04) in the PPM (+) vs. the PPM (-) groups was found. LV PSLS correlated with iEOAprosth (r = -0.520, p < 0.001) that was obtained three months after AVR. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of PPM in patients undergoing AVR for severe degenerative AS was associated with reduced LV PSLS in a three-month observation.

Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors: the value of FMD assessment in high risk patients is limited.

BACKGROUND: Since flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) is influenced by different factors, its clinical usefulness and validation is widely discussed. AIM: To assess the major factors that determine FMD values in a wide range of subjects with and without cardiovascular (CV) risk factors/diseases (CVRF/CVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: 617 consecutive patients (mean age: 50.1 ± 14.9 years, males: 349/56.5%) hospitalised between 2005 and 2011 were enrolled into the study. Demographic data and CVRF/CVD with a significant impact on FMD values were analysed: hyperlipidaemia, active smoking, arterial hypertension, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus and heart valve disease. The population was divided depending on the number of coexisting CVRF/CVD (0-, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-CVRF/CVD groups). The median FMD value in the entire group of patients was 10% (5-17). An analysis of the FMD percentage in particular groups showed significantly higher FMD values in patients without any CVRF/CVD (group 0), as well as in patients with one coexisting CVRF/CVD (group 1) compared to the other groups. The presence of two or more CVRF/CVD was not associated with a significantly higher FMD reduction. The analysis of patients with only one CVRF/CVD revealed the lowest FMD values in patients with coronary artery disease. CONCLUSIONS: FMD is related to the number of traditional CVRF/CVDs; however, coronary artery disease has the most significant influence on FMD decrease among analysed factors. The value of FMD assessment in high risk patients is limited.