Advertisement

Cryptogenic Stroke: Diagnostic Workup and Management

  • Brian Mac Grory
  • Shane P. Flood
  • Eirini Apostolidou
  • Shadi YaghiEmail author
Cerebrovascular Disease and Stroke (S Silverman, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Cerebrovascular Disease and Stroke

Abstract

Purpose of review

Cryptogenic stroke describes a subset of ischemic stroke for which no cause can be found despite a structured investigation. There are a number of putative mechanisms of cryptogenic ischemic stroke including a covert structural cardiac lesion, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, hypercoagulable state or undiagnosed malignancy. Because many of these proposed mechanisms are embolic – and based on studies of thrombus history showing commonalities between thrombus composition between cardioembolic and cryptogenic strokes – the concept of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) (Hart et al. Lancet Neurol. 13(4):429–38, 2014; Stroke. 48(4):867–72, 2017) has been proposed to describe cryptogenic strokes that may warrant systemic anticoagulation. In this review, we discuss the phenomena of cryptogenic stroke, ESUS and a proposed management pathway.

Recent findings

1. The concept of ESUS was proposed in 2014 as a potentially useful therapeutic entity. Two recent trials – NAVIGATE-ESUS (Hart et al. N Engl J Med. 378(23):2191–201, 2018) and RESPECT-ESUS (Diener 2018) were proposed based on this concept. They were negative for their primary endpoint and for the secondary endpoint of ischemic stroke recurrence. Post-hoc analysis of the WARSS trial (Longstreth et al. Stroke. 44(3):714–9, 2013) suggested that people with elevated pro-BNP benefited from systemic anticoagulation whereas those with a normal pro-BNP did not. This led to the hypothesis that a subgroup of patients at higher risk for embolism from the left atrium would benefit from anticoagulation, even if the WARSS trial was negative for the primary endpoint. Thus, the ARCADIA trial (Kamel et al. Int J Stroke. 14(2):207–14, 2019) was proposed – a randomized, active-control, multi-center trial comparing apixaban with aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS and biomarkers of left atrial cardiopathy. This trial is actively recruiting. 2. Carotid web – an intimal form of fibromuscular dysplasia – has come to increased prominence in the literature as a cause of embolic stroke. It is a non-stenosis, non-atherosclerotic lesion in the posterior wall of the internal carotid artery that leads to pooling with stasis of blood distal to the lesion and, as a consequence, embolic stroke. It is not usually detected by a standard stroke workup as it masquerades as non-calcified atherosclerosis and does not cause hemodynamically significant stenosis. There have been two major recent papers – a meta-analysis in Stroke (Zhang et al. Stroke. 49(12):2872–6, 2018) and narrative review in JAMA Neurology (Kim et al. JAMA Neurol. 2018) – that addressed this topic.

Summary

Cryptogenic stroke describes a stroke for which no cause has been found. ESUS is a more precisely-defined entity that mandates a specific workup and implicates remote embolism as a cause of stroke. In ESUS, the options for further investigation include long-term cardiac monitoring, transesophageal echocardiography, investigation for occult malignancy or arterial hypercoagulability. Options for management include anti-platelet therapy (the current standard of care), empiric anticoagulation or enrollment in to a clinical trial examining the use of NOACs compared with aspirin for secondary prevention (such as ARCADIA or ATTICUS). In a person less than 60 years old with ESUS and a patent foramen ovale the risk of a recurrent stroke is low but recent trials have suggested that percutaneous device closure reduces this risk further with an acceptable complication rate.

Keywords

Cryptogenic stroke Embolic stroke Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation Patent foramen ovale Cardiac monitoring 

Notes

Funding

This research was supported by the American Heart Association award #17MCPRP33670965.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Brian Mac Grory, Shane Flood, Eirini Apostolidou, and Shadi Yaghi each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References and recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Adams HP, Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ, Biller J, Love BB, Gordon DL, et al. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of org 10172 in acute stroke treatment. Stroke. 1993;24(1):35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ornello R, Degan D, Tiseo C, Di Carmine C, Perciballi L, Pistoia F, et al. Distribution and temporal trends from 1993 to 2015 of ischemic stroke subtypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2018;49(4):814–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hart RG, Diener HC, Coutts SB, Easton JD, Granger CB, O'Donnell MJ, et al. Embolic strokes of undetermined source: the case for a new clinical construct. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(4):429–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hart RG, Catanese L, Perera KS, Ntaios G, Connolly SJ. Embolic stroke of undetermined source: a systematic review and clinical update. Stroke. 2017;48(4):867–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sacco RL, Ellenberg JH, Mohr JP, Tatemichi TK, Hier DB, Price TR, et al. Infarcts of undetermined cause: the NINCDS stroke data Bank. Ann Neurol. 1989;25(4):382–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li L, Yiin GS, Geraghty OC, Schulz UG, Kuker W, Mehta Z, et al. Incidence, outcome, risk factors, and long-term prognosis of cryptogenic transient ischaemic attack and ischaemic stroke: a population-based study. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(9):903–13.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ntaios G, Vemmos K, Lip GY, Koroboki E, Manios E, Vemmou A, et al. Risk stratification for recurrence and mortality in embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2016;47(9):2278–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sporns PB, Hanning U, Schwindt W, Velasco A, Minnerup J, Zoubi T, et al. Ischemic stroke: what does the histological composition tell us about the origin of the Thrombus? Stroke. 2017;48(8):2206–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lamy C, Giannesini C, Zuber M, Arquizan C, Meder JF, Trystram D, et al. Clinical and imaging findings in cryptogenic stroke patients with and without patent foramen ovale: the PFO-ASA study. Atrial septal aneurysm. Stroke. 2002;33(3):706–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glotzer TV, Ziegler PD. Silent atrial fibrillation as a stroke risk factor and anticoagulation indication. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29(7 Suppl):S14–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gladstone DJ, Spring M, Dorian P, Panzov V, Thorpe KE, Hall J, et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(26):2467–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, Di Lazzaro V, Bernstein RA, Morillo CA, et al. Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(26):2478–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kamel H, Bartz TM, Elkind MSV, Okin PM, Thacker EL, Patton KK, et al. Atrial Cardiopathy and the risk of ischemic stroke in the CHS (cardiovascular health study). Stroke. 2018;49(4):980–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montalvo M, Tadi P, Merkler A, Gialdini G, Martin-Schild S, Navalkele D, et al. PR interval prolongation and cryptogenic stroke: a multicenter retrospective study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2017;26(10):2416–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fonseca AC, Alves P, Inácio N, Marto JP, Viana-Baptista M, Pinho-E-Melo T, et al. Patients with undetermined stroke have increased atrial fibrosis: a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging study. Stroke. 2018;49(3):734–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yaghi S, Kamel H, Elkind MSV. Atrial cardiopathy: a mechanism of cryptogenic stroke. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2017;15(8):591–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Katsanos AH, Bhole R, Frogoudaki A, Giannopoulos S, Goyal N, Vrettou AR, et al. The value of transesophageal echocardiography for embolic strokes of undetermined source. Neurology. 2016;87(10):988–95.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kwong Y, Troupis J. Cardiac CT imaging in the context of left atrial appendage occlusion. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2015;9(1):13–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Romero J, Husain SA, Kelesidis I, Sanz J, Medina HM, Garcia MJ. Detection of left atrial appendage thrombus by cardiac computed tomography in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6(2):185–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hur J, Kim YJ, Lee HJ, Nam JE, Ha JW, Heo JH, et al. Dual-enhanced cardiac CT for detection of left atrial appendage thrombus in patients with stroke: a prospective comparison study with transesophageal echocardiography. Stroke. 2011;42(9):2471–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hur J, Kim YJ, Lee HJ, Nam JE, Hong YJ, Kim HY, et al. Cardioembolic stroke: dual-energy cardiac CT for differentiation of left atrial appendage thrombus and circulatory stasis. Radiology. 2012;263(3):688–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim YJ, Hur J, Shim CY, Lee HJ, Ha JW, Choe KO, et al. Patent foramen ovale: diagnosis with multidetector CT--comparison with transesophageal echocardiography. Radiology. 2009;250(1):61–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yaghi S, Liberman AL, Atalay M, Song C, Furie KL, Kamel H, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a new tool to identify cardioaortic sources in ischaemic stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2017;88(1):31–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    de Groot NM, Schalij MJ. Imaging modalities for measurements of left atrial volume in patients with atrial fibrillation: what do we choose? Europace. 2010;12(6):766–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology, in collaboration with the Association of European Paediatric Cardiologists. The clinical role of magnetic resonance in cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J. 1998;19(1):19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baher A, Mowla A, Kodali S, Polsani VR, Nabi F, Nagueh SF, et al. Cardiac MRI improves identification of etiology of acute ischemic stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014;37(4):277–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Takasugi J, Yamagami H, Noguchi T, Morita Y, Tanaka T, Okuno Y, et al. Detection of left ventricular Thrombus by cardiac magnetic resonance in embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2017;48(9):2434–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Thanigaraj S, Valika A, Zajarias A, Lasala JM, Perez JE. Comparison of transthoracic versus transesophageal echocardiography for detection of right-to-left atrial shunting using agitated saline contrast. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96(7):1007–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Daniëls C, Weytjens C, Cosyns B, Schoors D, De Sutter J, Paelinck B, et al. Second harmonic transthoracic echocardiography: the new reference screening method for the detection of patent foramen ovale. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2004;5(6):449–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mas JL, Derumeaux G, Guillon B, Massardier E, Hosseini H, Mechtouff L, et al. Patent foramen Ovale closure or anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1011–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Caputi L, Carriero MR, Falcone C, Parati E, Piotti P, Materazzo C, et al. Transcranial Doppler and transesophageal echocardiography: comparison of both techniques and prospective clinical relevance of transcranial Doppler in patent foramen ovale detection. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2009;18(5):343–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gupta A, Gialdini G, Lerario MP, Baradaran H, Giambrone A, Navi BB, et al. Magnetic resonance angiography detection of abnormal carotid artery plaque in patients with cryptogenic stroke. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(6):e002012.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Komatsu T, Iguchi Y, Arai A, Sakuta K, Sakai K, Terasawa Y, et al. Large but nonstenotic carotid artery plaque in patients with a history of embolic stroke of undetermined source. Stroke. 2018;49(12):3054–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Amarenco P, Cohen A, Tzourio C, Bertrand B, Hommel M, Besson G, et al. Atherosclerotic disease of the aortic arch and the risk of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1994;331(22):1474–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Harloff A, Simon J, Brendecke S, Assefa D, Helbing T, Frydrychowicz A, et al. Complex plaques in the proximal descending aorta: an underestimated embolic source of stroke. Stroke. 2010;41(6):1145–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mitusch R, Doherty C, Wucherpfennig H, Memmesheimer C, Tepe C, Stierle U, et al. Vascular events during follow-up in patients with aortic arch atherosclerosis. Stroke. 1997;28(1):36–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cohen A, Tzourio C, Bertrand B, Chauvel C, Bousser MG, Amarenco P. Aortic plaque morphology and vascular events: a follow-up study in patients with ischemic stroke. FAPS investigators. French study of aortic plaques in stroke. Circulation. 1997;96(11):3838–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rundek T, Di Tullio MR, Sciacca RR, Titova IV, Mohr JP, Homma S, et al. Association between large aortic arch atheromas and high-intensity transientsignals in elderly stroke patients. Stroke. 1999;30:2683-2686.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ko Y, Kim WJ, Jang MS, Yang MH, Park JH, Choi SI, et al. Is aortic atherothrombotic disease detected using multidetector-row CT associated with an increased risk of early ischemic lesion recurrence after acute ischemic stroke? Stroke. 2012;43(3):764–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chatzikonstantinou A, Krissak R, Flüchter S, Artemis D, Schaefer A, Schoenberg SO, et al. CT angiography of the aorta is superior to transesophageal echocardiography for determining stroke subtypes in patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;33(4):322–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bushnell CD, Goldstein LB. Diagnostic testing for coagulopathies in patients with ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2000;31(12):3067–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Choi PM, Singh D, Trivedi A, Qazi E, George D, Wong J, et al. Carotid webs and recurrent ischemic strokes in the era of CT angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(11):2134–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Compagne KCJ, Dilba K, Postema EJ, van Es ACGM, Emmer BJ, Majoie CBLM, et al. Flow patterns in carotid webs: a patient-based computational fluid dynamics study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Haussen DC, Grossberg JA, Bouslama M, Pradilla G, Belagaje S, Bianchi N, et al. Carotid web (intimal fibromuscular dysplasia) has high stroke recurrence risk and is amenable to stenting. Stroke. 2017;48(11):3134–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    De novo formation of a carotid web: case report. J Neurosurg 2018:1–4.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Compagne KCJ, van Es ACGM, Berkhemer OA, Borst J, Roos YBWE, van Oostenbrugge RJ, et al. Prevalence of carotid web in patients with acute intracranial stroke due to intracranial large vessel occlusion. Radiology. 2018;286(3):1000–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Joux J, Chausson N, Jeannin S, Saint-Vil M, Mejdoubi M, Hennequin JL, et al. Carotid-bulb atypical fibromuscular dysplasia in young afro-Caribbean patients with stroke. Stroke. 2014;45(12):3711–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Joux J, Boulanger M, Jeannin S, Chausson N, Hennequin JL, Molinié V, et al. Association between carotid bulb diaphragm and ischemic stroke in young afro-Caribbean patients: a population-based case-control study. Stroke. 2016;47(10):2641–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    •• Zhang AJ, Dhruv P, Choi P, Bakker C, Koffel J, Anderson D, et al. A Systematic Literature Review of Patients With Carotid Web and Acute Ischemic Stroke. Stroke. 2018;49(12):2872–6. A systematic literature review describing the world literature review to-date on carotid webs and the association with ischemic stroke. This article emphasizes the high rate of recurrent stroke in people with webs, potential efficacy of carotid stenting and also the selection bias in the literature to-date.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mohr JP, Thompson JL, Lazar RM, Levin B, Sacco RL, Furie KL, et al. A comparison of warfarin and aspirin for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(20):1444–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51. ••
    Hart RG, Sharma M, Mundl H, Kasner SE, Bangdiwala SI, Berkowitz SD, et al. Rivaroxaban for Stroke Prevention after Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(23):2191–201. The NAVIGATE-ESUS trial. This randomized trial compared aspirin with rivaroxaban for secondary stroke prevention. It showed a low rate of recurrent stroke (<5%) in both treatment and active-controls arms but no benefit from anticoagulation for the primary outcome or secondary outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke. This trial will end up being very important in future trials that refine a population of people with ESUS that benefit from anticoagulation.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Diener HC, Sacco RL, Easton JD, Granger CB, Bernstein RA, Uchiyama S, et al. Dabigatran for prevention of stroke after embolic stroke of undeterminedsource. The New England journal of medicine. 2019;380:1906-1917.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Geisler T, Poli S, Meisner C, Schreieck J, Zuern CS, Nägele T, et al. Apixaban for treatment of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ATTICUS randomized trial): rationale and study design. Int J Stroke. 2017;12(9):985–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kamel H, Longstreth WT, Tirschwell DL, Kronmal RA, Broderick JP, Palesch YY, et al. The AtRial Cardiopathy and antithrombotic drugs in prevention after cryptogenic stroke randomized trial: rationale and methods. Int J Stroke. 2019;14(2):207–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Longstreth WT, Kronmal RA, Thompson JL, Christenson RH, Levine SR, Gross R, et al. Amino terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, secondary stroke prevention, and choice of antithrombotic therapy. Stroke. 2013;44(3):714–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Meier B, Kalesan B, Mattle HP, Khattab AA, Hildick-Smith D, Dudek D, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic embolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1083–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    •• Søndergaard L, Kasner SE, Rhodes JF, Andersen G, Iversen HK, Nielsen-Kudsk JE, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1033–42. The GORE-REDUCE trial. This trial compared medical therapy with percutaneous PFO closure in people with embolic-appearing strokes and a PFO and showed a dramatic benefit (6.8% risk of clinical ischemic stroke in medical treatment group and 1.3% risk in device closure group over median of 3.2 years).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lee PH, Song JK, Kim JS, Heo R, Lee S, Kim DH, et al. Cryptogenic stroke and high-risk patent foramen Ovale: the DEFENSE-PFO trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(20):2335–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J, Mauri L, Adams H, Albers GW, et al. Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(11):991–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Carroll JD, Saver JL, Thaler DE, Smalling RW, Berry S, MacDonald LA, et al. Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1092–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Saver JL, Carroll JD, Thaler DE, Smalling RW, MacDonald LA, Marks DS, et al. Long-term outcomes of patent foramen Ovale closure or medical therapy after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1022–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mir H, Siemieniuk RAC, Ge LC, Foroutan F, Fralick M, Syed T, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure, antiplatelet therapy or anticoagulation in patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis incorporating complementary external evidence. BMJ Open. 2018;8(7):e023761.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    European Carotid Surgery Trialists' Collaborative Group. MRC European Carotid Surgery trial: interim results for symptomatic patients with severe (70-99%) or with mild (0-29%) carotid stenosis. Lancet. 1991;337(8752):1235–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Derdeyn CP, Turan TN, Fiorella D, Lane BF, et al. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):993–1003.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Amarenco P, Davis S, Jones EF, Cohen AA, Heiss WD, Kaste M, et al. Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus warfarin in patients with stroke and aortic arch plaques. Stroke. 2014;45(5):1248–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Yaghi S, Song C, Gray WA, Furie KL, Elkind MS, Kamel H. Left atrial appendage function and stroke risk. Stroke. 2015;46(12):3554–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Yaghi S, Chang AD, Hung P, Mac Grory B, Collins S, Gupta A, et al. Left atrial appendage morphology and embolic stroke of undetermined source: a cross-sectional multicenter pilot study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;27(6):1497–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kim SJ, Nogueira RG, Haussen DC. Current understanding and gaps in research of carotid webs in ischemic strokes: a review. JAMA Neurol. 2018.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Mac Grory
    • 1
  • Shane P. Flood
    • 2
  • Eirini Apostolidou
    • 2
  • Shadi Yaghi
    • 3
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyWarren Alpert Medical School of Brown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  2. 2.Department of CardiologyWarren Alpert Medical School of Brown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Department of NeurologyNew York University School of MedicineNew York CityUSA
  4. 4.Department of NeurologyNew York University School of Medicine, NYU Langone HospitalBrooklynUSA

Personalised recommendations