A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Exploring the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source according to stroke risk stratification: Propensity-score matched analysis. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Introduction: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is widely used for embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) despite limited evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. This study compared DAPT and single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) in patients with ESUS during hospitalization (first 7 days) and up to 30 days post-stroke, identifying subgroups that benefit most from DAPT.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 4,505 patients with ESUS enrolled in a multicenter registry from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome was early neurological deterioration (END) within 7 days of stroke onset, and the secondary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) within 30 days. Propensity score matching (1:1) was applied to balance baseline characteristics, and subgroup analysis was conducted based on Essen stroke risk score (ESRS, ≥3 vs. <3).

Results: After matching, 1,835 patients were included in each treatment group for END analysis. In the overall cohort, DAPT did not significantly reduce END compared to SAPT (2.8 % vs. 3.5 %, adjusted OR 0.800; p = 0.202). Similarly, there was no significant difference in 30-day MACE (1.3 % vs. 1.4 %, adjusted HR 1.124; p = 0.512). However, in patients with ESRS ≥3, DAPT was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of END (2.2 % vs. 5.4 %, PS-adjusted OR 0.563; p = 0.036), with no increase in major bleeding.

Conclusion: DAPT did not confer benefit in unselected patients with ESUS but was effective in reducing END in high-risk individuals with ESRS ≥3. These findings support a risk-stratified approach to DAPT use in ESUS.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2025.108438DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

antiplatelet therapy
12
efficacy safety
8
dual antiplatelet
8
embolic stroke
8
stroke undetermined
8
undetermined source
8
stroke risk
8
patients esus
8
stroke
5
exploring efficacy
4

Similar Publications