Asymptomatic coronary artery disease in ischaemic stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Ischaemic stroke and coronary artery disease share risk factors and stroke survivors experience a high rate of cardiac events. Recent work suggests a high burden of asymptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) in ischaemic stroke survivors. Thus, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to A) estimate the prevalence of CAD in ischaemic stroke survivors without known CAD and B) evaluate the association between coronary atherosclerosis and future major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in stroke survivors.Patients and Methods:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the PRISMA statement. We included studies investigating acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack where participants underwent anatomical assessment of all coronary arteries. For objective B) we included studies that reported an association between coronary atherosclerosis and MACE. Two reviewers used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias. We used random-effects modelling for our analyses.Results:We identified 2983 studies of which 17 were included. These studies had a total of 6862 participants between 2008 and 2022. The pooled prevalence of any coronary atherosclerosis was 66.8% (95% CI 57.2%–75.1%) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 95.2%). The pooled prevalence of obstructive (>50%) stenosis was 29.3% with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 91%). High-risk coronary anatomy (triple vessel disease or left main stenosis) was found in 7.0% (95% CI 4%–12%) with high heterogeneity I2 = 72%. One study examined high-risk plaques and found a prevalence of 5.9%. Five studies reported the association of coronary atherosclerosis with future MACE. The presence of obstructive CAD confers a HR of 8.0 (95% CI 1.7–37.1, p = 0.007) for future MACE.Discussion and Conclusions:Asymptomatic CAD is common in ischaemic stroke survivors. The presence and severity of asymptomatic CAD strongly associates with the risk of future MACE. Further evaluation of the benefits of routine coronary assessment in ischaemic stroke is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".