Atrial Fibrillation and Mechanisms of Stroke
2016; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 47; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/strokeaha.115.012004
ISSN1524-4628
AutoresHooman Kamel, Peter M. Okin, Mitchell S.V. Elkind, Costantino Iadecola,
Tópico(s)Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
ResumoHomeStrokeVol. 47, No. 3Atrial Fibrillation and Mechanisms of Stroke Free AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAtrial Fibrillation and Mechanisms of StrokeTime for a New Model Hooman Kamel, MD, Peter M. Okin, MD, Mitchell S.V. Elkind, MD, MS and Costantino Iadecola, MD Hooman KamelHooman Kamel From the Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (H.K., C.I.) and Division of Cardiology (P.M.O.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; and Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (M.S.V.E.). , Peter M. OkinPeter M. Okin From the Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (H.K., C.I.) and Division of Cardiology (P.M.O.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; and Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (M.S.V.E.). , Mitchell S.V. ElkindMitchell S.V. Elkind From the Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (H.K., C.I.) and Division of Cardiology (P.M.O.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; and Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (M.S.V.E.). and Costantino IadecolaCostantino Iadecola From the Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (H.K., C.I.) and Division of Cardiology (P.M.O.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; and Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY (M.S.V.E.). Originally published19 Jan 2016https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.012004Stroke. 2016;47:895–900Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 1, 2016: Previous Version 1 Thirty-three million people have atrial fibrillation (AF), a disorder of heart rhythm.1 Over the past several decades, we have learned that this dysrhythmia originates in the interplay between genetic predisposition, ectopic electrical activity, and abnormal atrial tissue substrate and then feeds back to remodel and worsen tissue substrate and, thereby, propagates itself.2 Although the importance of AF partly derives from its strong association with ischemic stroke, there have not been as many advances in our understanding of the mechanisms of stroke in AF. Current views rest on a century old hypothesis that fibrillation of the atrium produces stasis of blood, which causes thrombus formation and embolism to the brain. When other abnormalities are acknowledged to play a role, the dysrhythmia is still considered the primary cause of thromboembolism.3 Although this formulation is intuitively appealing, recent work suggests that the pathogenesis of stroke in AF is more complicated and involves factors in addition to the dysrhythmia.Possible Stroke Mechanisms in AFAF and stroke have been associated in rigorous studies,4 indicating a true association rather than a spurious finding. Epidemiological logic suggests 3 explanations: (1) AF causes stroke, (2) stroke causes AF, and (3) AF is associated with other factors that cause stroke.AF as a Cause of StrokeTo help judge whether one factor causes another or whether the 2 are simply correlated, the epidemiologist Bradford Hill proposed the following widely accepted criteria: (1) strength of association, (2) consistency, (3) specificity, (4) temporality, (5) biological gradient, (6) plausibility, (7) coherence, (8) accordance with experimental results, and (9) analogy.5 The relationship between AF and stroke fulfills several of these criteria. Patients with AF face a strongly elevated risk of stroke—about 3- to 5-fold higher after adjustment for risk factors.4 AF has been consistently associated with stroke in different cohorts.6 And a causal association is biologically plausible. Intuitively, uncoordinated myocyte activity would explain the impaired atrial contraction seen in AF, and by Virchow's triad, the resulting stasis of blood should increase thromboembolic risk.However, several other Hill criteria do not support a straightforward relationship between AF and stroke. Although many studies have found a biological gradient between AF burden and stroke,7–10 this is not consistent across all studies.11 Furthermore, a single brief episode of subclinical AF is associated with a 2-fold higher risk of stroke in older patients with vascular risk factors,12 whereas young and otherwise healthy patients with clinically apparent AF do not face a significantly increased stroke risk.13 These conflicting data do not suffice to establish a clear biological gradient between the burden of AF and the risk of stroke.The relationship between AF and stroke also fails Hill's criterion of specificity. If AF causes thromboembolism, it should be specifically associated with embolic strokes. There does appear to be an especially strong association between AF and embolic strokes.14 However, 10% of patients with lacunar strokes have AF,14 and large-artery atherosclerosis is twice as common in patients with AF as those without.15 The link between AF and non-cardioembolic stroke indicates that stroke risk in AF cannot be entirely explained by AF directly causing stroke.Third, the association between AF and stroke does not fully satisfy Hill's criterion of temporality. A recent case-crossover analysis indicated an increased risk of stroke shortly after the onset of AF.16 On the other hand, 2 other recent studies found that approximately one third of patients with both AF and stroke do not manifest any AF until after stroke, despite undergoing many months of continuous heart-rhythm monitoring before the stroke.17,18 These findings suggest that although the dysrhythmia itself can cause thromboembolism, the strong association between AF and stroke also involves other factors.Fourth, a causal interpretation of the association between AF and stroke does not adequately fit the available experimental evidence. If the dysrhythmia is the only cause of thromboembolism, maintaining normal rhythm should eliminate stroke risk. However, in a meta-analysis of 8 randomized clinical trials, a rhythm-control strategy had no effect on stroke risk (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–1.30).19 It is unlikely that this simply reflected a failure to reliably maintain sinus rhythm because rhythm-control strategies showed substantial success in maintaining normal sinus rhythm (odds ratio, 4.39; 95% confidence interval, 2.84–6.78). Furthermore, the structural remodeling seen in experimental models of AF occurs after at least a week of sustained rapid pacing,20 so any atrial changes caused by AF are unlikely to explain the association between a single 6-minute episode of AF and a heightened risk of stroke in humans.12 Therefore, robust experimental evidence is lacking to indicate that AF is a necessary step in thrombogenesis.Stroke as a Cause of AFCentral nervous system injuries often affect the autonomic nervous system, which plays an important role in the pathogenesis of AF.21 And necrotic cell death from stroke activates a systemic inflammatory response, which also plays a role in the origin of AF.22 Clinical observations support the hypothesis that stroke may trigger AF. Strokes affecting cerebral autonomic centers seem particularly associated with new-onset AF that lacks accompaniments of long-standing AF, such as left atrial enlargement.23 However, other clinical findings argue against this hypothesis,24 and even if stroke can trigger AF, this pathway cannot explain the well-documented association between AF and future stroke.4,6AF-Associated Factors as Causes of StrokeBesides causing stroke, AF may also be associated with other factors that cause stroke. Age, male sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, valvular heart disease, heart failure, coronary heart disease, chronic kidney disease, inflammatory disorders, sleep apnea, and tobacco use are risk factors for both AF and stroke. Confounding in the AF–stroke association is indicated by its attenuation as more shared risk factors are accounted for.4,6 Nevertheless, AF remains independently associated with stroke even after seemingly thorough adjustment for shared risk factors. And AF is associated not just with stroke in general, but most strongly with strokes whose neuroimaging patterns resemble that of cardiac embolism.25Even if the origin of stroke in AF is accepted to be the left atrium, other atrial factors in addition to AF may cause thromboembolism. Rather than being the only cause of atrial thromboembolism, could AF sometimes be a marker of other atrial abnormalities that are themselves the actual cause of stroke? AF frequently co-exists with atrial abnormalities, such as endothelial dysfunction,26 fibrosis,27 impaired myocyte function,28 chamber dilatation,29 and mechanical dysfunction in the left atrial appendage.30 These abnormalities have been documented in both experimental animal models26 and in humans.27–30 Such factors have been associated with stroke risk in patients with AF31—could these atrial abnormalities also arise independently of AF and cause stroke? If so, they should be associated with stroke even in the absence of AF. Indeed, premature atrial contractions,32 paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia,33 ECG-defined left atrial abnormality,34–36 and left atrial size37–39 have been associated with stroke independently of AF (Table). Markers of atrial dysfunction are specifically associated with cryptogenic or embolic stroke and not with in situ cerebral small-vessel occlusion,34,36,38 indicating that these markers signal a specific risk of atrial thromboembolism rather than general vascular risk.Table. Studies Demonstrating an Association Between Markers of Abnormal Atrial Substrate and Incident Stroke Independently of Atrial FibrillationMarkerAuthorsYearOutcomeAssociationNot Adjusted for AFAdjusted for AFECG markers Frequent PACsBinici et al402010Stroke1.79 (1.14–2.81)*1.73 (1.09–2.75)* PSVTKamel et al332013StrokeN/A2.10 (1.69–2.62)† PTFV1Kamel et al352014Stroke1.22 (1.03–1.45)‡1.21 (1.02–1.44)‡ PTFV1Kamel et al412014Infarct§1.09 (1.04–1.16)‡1.09 (1.04–1.15)‡ Frequent PACsLarsen et al322015Stroke2.00 (1.16–3.45)‖ PTFV1Kamel et al342015Non-lacunar stroke1.44 (1.04–1.99)#1.49 (1.07–2.07)# PTFV1Kamel et al362015Cryptogenic or cardioembolic stroke1.28 (1.07–1.53)‡1.31 (1.08–1.58)‡Echocardiographic markers Left atrial sizeBenjamin et al371995StrokeN/A2.4 (1.6–3.7)** Left atrial sizeDi Tullio et al391999StrokeN/A1.47 (1.03–2.11)†† Left atrial sizeKaras et al422012StrokeN/A1.35 (1.12–1.62)‡‡ Left atrial sizeYaghi et al382015Cryptogenic or cardioembolic strokeN/A1.55 (1.01–2.37)‡‡ Left atrial volumeBarnes et al432004StrokeN/A1.63 (1.08–2.46)§§ Left atrial volumeRusso et al442013InfarctN/A1.37 (1.04–1.80)‖‖ Left atrial functionRusso et al442013InfarctN/A0.67 (0.50–0.90)##AF indicates atrial fibrillation; ECG, electrocardiographic; PACs, premature atrial contractions; PSVT, paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia; and PTFV1, P-wave terminal force in lead V1.*Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the primary outcome of death or stroke.†HR (95% CI) associated with a diagnosis of PSVT.‡HR (95% CI) per 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in PTFV1.§Infarct refers to silent brain infarcts detected on magnetic resonance imaging.‖HR (95% CI) associated with excessive PACs, defined as ≥30 PACs per hour.#HR (95% CI) associated with ECG-defined left atrial abnormality (PTFV1≥4000 ms μV).**HR (95% CI) per 10-mm increase in left atrial size in men. The association was not significant in women (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.9–2.1).††Odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI per 10 mm/1.7 m2 increase in the left atrial diameter divided by body surface area (left atrial index).‡‡HR (95% CI) per 1-SD increase in left atrial size.§§HR (95% CI) for left atrial volume ≥32 mL/m2.‖‖HR (95% CI) per 1-SD increase in left atrial minimum volume.##OR (95% CI) for each 1-SD increase in the left atrial ejection fraction.Might these associations be mediated by AF? Left atrial abnormalities may reflect abnormal atrial substrate, which causes paroxysmal and difficult-to-detect AF, which then causes stroke.37,39 However, adjustment for clinically apparent AF does not change the association between left atrial abnormalities and stroke34–36—an unexpected finding if AF mediates their relationship. Another interpretation of these associations is that subclinical AF causes abnormal atrial substrate, which then causes stroke. In this interpretation, AF is again required for downstream changes to occur and result in thrombogenesis. However, structural remodeling seems to require weeks of AF,20 not just the 6 minutes that suffice to signify an increased stroke risk.12 Such inconsistencies undermine the concept of AF as the sole cause of the atrial abnormalities that have been associated with stroke. These associations and their lack of attenuation after adjustment for AF suggest that atrial disease causes thrombogenesis via additional pathways besides AF. Proof of principle is offered by a homozygous mutation of the natriuretic peptide precursor A gene. Even though AF is absent, this disorder leads to atrial dilatation, progressive loss of atrial activity with eventual atrial standstill, and thromboembolism.45Updated Model for the Mechanisms of Stroke in AFGiven the above findings, the mechanistic basis of stroke in patients with AF is likely to be more complex than currently appreciated. An up-to-date model must emphasize systemic and atrial substrate as well as rhythm (Figure). Aging and systemic vascular risk factors cause an abnormal atrial tissue substrate, or atrial cardiopathy, that can result in AF and thromboembolism. For atrial cardiopathy to play such a role in thrombogenesis would be analogous to the ventricular cardiopathy seen in myocardial infarction and heart failure, 2 diseases in which thromboembolism can occur even in the absence of dysrhythmia. Once AF develops, the dysrhythmia causes contractile dysfunction and stasis, which further increases the risk of thromboembolism. In addition, over time, the dysrhythmia causes structural remodeling of the atrium, thereby worsening atrial cardiopathy and increasing the risk of thromboembolism even further. In parallel, systemic risk factors increase stroke risk via other mechanisms outside the atrium, such as large-artery atherosclerosis, ventricular systolic dysfunction, and in situ cerebral small-vessel occlusion. Once stroke occurs, autonomic changes and post-stroke inflammation may transiently increase AF risk.Download figureDownload PowerPointFigure. Updated model of thromboembolic stroke. This model emphasizes the importance of systemic and atrial substrate as well as rhythm in explaining the relationship between atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke. In this model, aging and systemic vascular risk factors cause an abnormal atrial tissue substrate, or atrial cardiopathy, that can result in AF and thromboembolism. Once AF develops, the dysrhythmia causes contractile dysfunction and stasis, which further increases the risk of thromboembolism. In addition, over time, the dysrhythmia causes structural remodeling of the atrium, thereby worsening atrial cardiopathy and increasing the risk of thromboembolism even further. In parallel, systemic risk factors increase stroke risk via other mechanisms outside the atrium, such as large-artery atherosclerosis, ventricular systolic dysfunction, and in-situ cerebral small-vessel occlusion. Once stroke occurs, autonomic changes and post-stroke inflammation may transiently increase AF risk.This updated model largely resolves the inconsistencies between the Hill criteria and recent data on the association between AF and stroke. If AF and thromboembolism occur as parallel but separate downstream effects of atrial cardiopathy, then AF can increase thromboembolic risk but is not necessary for thromboembolism to occur, so the timing and burden of dysrhythmia need not be coupled with the timing and burden of stroke. Under this construct, it would not be surprising that a brief period of AF is associated with stroke months later12 or that one third of patients with AF and stroke do not manifest AF until after their stroke.17 An atrial substrate model also explains the lack of specificity between AF and embolic stroke. AF patients often have nonembolic strokes because AF serves as a marker of upstream systemic vascular risk factors. Finally, a substrate model accords with experimental evidence and explains the otherwise puzzling observation that rhythm-control treatments do not eliminate stroke risk.19 If AF is only a secondary contributor to abnormal atrial tissue substrate, successful elimination of the dysrhythmia will not eliminate the thrombogenic potential of the underlying atrial cardiopathy.Implications of an Updated Model of StrokeBy placing atrial cardiopathy alongside AF as a cause of thromboembolic stroke, an updated model may help explain why one third of strokes have no known cause.46 Many cryptogenic strokes are suspected to arise from cardiac embolism, but only one third of these patients manifest AF even after 3 years of continuous heart-rhythm monitoring.47 Because we currently conceive of AF as the sine qua non of atrial thromboembolism, we may be failing to recognize cases that occur in the absence of AF and incorrectly labeling these strokes cryptogenic.An updated model of stroke and AF may lead to better strategies for identifying thromboembolic risk in patients with established AF. Assessing markers of abnormal atrial tissue substrate in addition to the burden of upstream vascular risk factors may better identify the few patients with truly lone AF who do not face a substantial risk of stroke.13 An updated model may also allow better screening for thromboembolic risk in the general population without known AF. AF screening is important but has been hampered by the difficulty of prolonged heart-rhythm monitoring. Assessment of atrial substrate by a standard ECG or echocardiogram can be done at a single point in time and may help augment AF screening efforts.A substrate model has several implications for therapeutic strategies to prevent stroke. The perception that the dysrhythmia is the only cause of thromboembolism often makes providers and patients reluctant to continue anticoagulant therapy during stretches of normal sinus rhythm.3 A greater emphasis on the atrial cardiopathy that led to AF in the first place, and which persists even if sinus rhythm returns, may reinforce the importance of continuing proven anticoagulant treatments. Similarly, recognition of atrial cardiopathy highlights the findings from randomized clinical trials that rhythm-control therapies, such as catheter ablation of AF, should not be viewed as a stand-alone form of thromboprophylaxis.19An updated model implies that treatments to reverse abnormal atrial substrate, not just to restore normal rhythm, may be beneficial in reducing thromboembolic risk. Underlying risk factors, such as obesity and the metabolic syndrome, promote AF and atrial cardiopathy through numerous mechanisms.48 Local epicardial fat is increasingly recognized as a contributor to local inflammation in the atrium, whereas obesity-induced obstructive sleep apnea raises intra-atrial pressures.49 Intensive vascular risk factor management after AF ablation appears to improve the underlying atrial substrate.50 Therefore, future trials may be warranted to assess whether treatment of atrial substrate reduces stroke risk. In addition, if AF is a downstream marker of vascular risk factors that separately produce nonatrial stroke mechanisms, such as carotid atherosclerosis or cerebral small-vessel disease, a comprehensive approach to stroke prevention should explore and emphasize intensive management of all risk factors, rather than just focusing on recommendations regarding anticoagulant therapy. Current guidelines on AF do not emphasize global risk factor management.51A substrate model also has implications for stroke prevention in patients without AF. If AF serves as a marker of thrombogenic atrial substrate, the benefit seen with anticoagulant drugs in AF may extend to patients with atrial cardiopathy but no AF. Randomized trials comparing anticoagulant versus antiplatelet therapies may be warranted in patients with markers of atrial cardiopathy and no evidence of AF.Many of the studies that found associations between atrial cardiopathy and stroke used consensus definitions of biomarker thresholds, but more work is required to determine whether additional markers, such as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of tissue fibrosis and computed tomographic assessment of left atrial appendage morphology, may better identify the risk of atrial thromboembolism. Combined with further research on the benefits of anticoagulation for varying degrees of atrial cardiopathy, such work would allow for a consensus definition of atrial cardiopathy to aid clinical decision making.ConclusionsThe prevailing model of AF and thromboembolism is likely incomplete. A straightforward association between AF and stroke does not convincingly demonstrate temporality, specificity, or a biological gradient, and it is not concordant with the totality of the available experimental evidence. A model in which thromboembolism is caused by both AF and abnormal systemic and atrial tissue substrate better fits the available data. Such a model has several important implications for stroke prevention strategies. By emphasizing systemic and atrial substrate in addition to rhythm, it points to new strategies for identifying and treating patients at risk of thromboembolism. Further research to test this model and the various strategies it suggests may result in improvements in stroke care and a reduction in the burden of this disabling disease, which accounts for 10% of deaths worldwide.Sources of FundingThis work was supported by grant K23NS082367 (Kamel) from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.DisclosuresDr Okin serves as a consultant to and has received research grants from Novartis Pharmaceuticals (modest). Dr Elkind receives compensation for providing consultative services for Biotelemetry/Cardionet, BMS-Pfizer Partnership, Biogen IDEC, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals (all modest); receives royalties from UpToDate for a chapter related to cryptogenic stroke (modest); and participates in the American Heart Association's Cryptogenic Stroke Initiative. Drs Kamel and Iadecola report no potential conflicts of interest.FootnotesThe opinions expressed in the article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.Guest Editor for this article was Seemant Chaturvedi, MD.Correspondence to Hooman Kamel, MD, 407 E 61st St, New York, NY 10065. E-mail [email protected]References1. Chugh SS, Havmoeller R, Narayanan K, Singh D, Rienstra M, Benjamin EJ, et al. Worldwide epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: a Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study.Circulation. 2014; 129:837–847. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.005119.LinkGoogle Scholar2. Heijman J, Voigt N, Nattel S, Dobrev D.Cellular and molecular electrophysiology of atrial fibrillation initiation, maintenance, and progression.Circ Res. 2014; 114:1483–1499. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.302226.LinkGoogle Scholar3. Zimetbaum P, Waks JW, Ellis ER, Glotzer TV, Passman RS.Role of atrial fibrillation burden in assessing thromboembolic risk.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014; 7:1223–1229. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.114.001356.LinkGoogle Scholar4. Wolf PA, Dawber TR, Thomas HE, Kannel WB.Epidemiologic assessment of chronic atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke: the Framingham study.Neurology. 1978; 28:973–977.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Hill AB.The environment and disease: association or causation?Proc R Soc Med. 1965; 58:295–300.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Manolio TA, Kronmal RA, Burke GL, O'Leary DH, Price TR.Short-term predictors of incident stroke in older adults. The Cardiovascular Health Study.Stroke. 1996; 27:1479–1486.LinkGoogle Scholar7. Al-Khatib SM, Thomas L, Wallentin L, Lopes RD, Gersh B, Garcia D, et al. Outcomes of apixaban vs. warfarin by type and duration of atrial fibrillation: results from the ARISTOTLE trial.Eur Heart J. 2013; 34:2464–2471. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht135.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Vanassche T, Lauw MN, Eikelboom JW, Healey JS, Hart RG, Alings M, et al. Risk of ischaemic stroke according to pattern of atrial fibrillation: analysis of 6563 aspirin-treated patients in ACTIVE-A and AVERROES.Eur Heart J. 2015; 36:281–287a. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu307.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Glotzer TV, Daoud EG, Wyse DG, Singer DE, Ezekowitz MD, Hilker C, et al. The relationship between daily atrial tachyarrhythmia burden from implantable device diagnostics and stroke risk: the TRENDS study.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2009; 2:474–480. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.109.849638.LinkGoogle Scholar10. Nuotio I, Hartikainen JE, Grönberg T, Biancari F, Airaksinen KE.Time to cardioversion for acute atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic complications.JAMA. 2014; 312:647–649. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.3824.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Flaker G, Ezekowitz M, Yusuf S, Wallentin L, Noack H, Brueckmann M, et al. Efficacy and safety of dabigatran compared to warfarin in patients with paroxysmal, persistent, and permanent atrial fibrillation: results from the RE-LY (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy) study.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59:854–855. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.10.896.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, Israel CW, Van Gelder IC, Capucci A, et al; ASSERT Investigators. Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke.N Engl J Med. 2012; 366:120–129. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1105575.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Chao TF, Liu CJ, Chen SJ, Wang KL, Lin YJ, Chang SL, et al. Atrial fibrillation and the risk of ischemic stroke: does it still matter in patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 0 or 1?Stroke. 2012; 43:2551–2555. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.667865.LinkGoogle Scholar14. Lodder J, Bamford JM, Sandercock PA, Jones LN, Warlow CP.Are hypertension or cardiac embolism likely causes of lacunar infarction?Stroke. 1990; 21:375–381.LinkGoogle Scholar15. Chesebro JH, Fuster V, Halperin JL.Atrial fibrillation–risk marker for stroke.N Engl J Med. 1990; 323:1556–1558. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199011293232209.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Turakhia MP, Ziegler PD, Schmitt SK, Chang Y, Fan J, Than CT, et al. Atrial fibrillation burden and short-term risk of stroke: case-crossover analysis of continuously recorded heart rhythm from cardiac electronic implanted devices.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015; 8:1040–1047. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.114.003057.LinkGoogle Scholar17. Brambatti M, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, Morillo CA, Capucci A, Muto C, et al; ASSERT Investigators. Temporal relationship between subclinical atrial fibrillation and embolic events.Circulation. 2014; 129:2094–2099. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.007825.LinkGoogle Scholar18. Martin DT, Bersohn MM, Waldo AL, Wathen MS, Choucair WK, Lip GY, et al; IMPACT Investigators. Randomized trial of atrial arrhythmia monitoring to guide anticoagulation in patients with implanted defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization devices.Eur Heart J. 2015; 36:1660–1668. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv115.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. Al-Khatib SM, Allen LaPointe NM, Chatterjee R, Crowley MJ, Dupre ME, Kong DF, et al. Rate- and rhythm-control therapies in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review.Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160:760–773. doi: 10.7326/M13-1467.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar20. De Jong AM, Maass AH, Oberdorf-Maass SU, Van Veldhuisen DJ, Van Gilst WH, Van Gelder IC.Mechanisms of atrial structural changes caused by stretch occurring before and during early atrial fibrillation.Cardiovasc Res. 2011; 89:754–765. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvq357.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar21. Chen PS, Chen LS, Fishbein MC, Lin SF, Nattel S.Role of the autonomic nervous system in atrial fibrillation: pathophysiology and therapy.Circ Res. 2014; 114:1500–1515. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303772.LinkGoogle Scholar22. Chung MK, Martin DO, Sprecher D, Wazni O, Kanderian A, Carnes CA, et al. C-reactive protein elevation in patients with atrial arrhythmias: inflammatory mechanisms and persistence of atrial fibrillation.Circulation. 2001; 104:2886–2891.LinkGoogle Scholar23. González Toledo ME, Klein FR, Riccio PM, Cassará FP, Muñoz Giacomelli F, Racosta JM, et al. Atrial fibrillation detected after acute ischemic stroke: evidence supporting the neurogenic hypothesis.J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013; 22:e486–e491. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.05.015.Google Scholar24. Abboud H, Berroir S, Labreuche J, Orjuela K, Amarenco P; GENIC Investigators. Insular involvement in brain infarction increases risk for cardiac arrhythmia and death.Ann Neurol. 2006; 59:691–699. doi: 10.1002/ana.20806.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar25. Boiten J, Lodder J.Lacunar infarcts. Pathogenesis and validity of the clinical syndromes.Stroke. 1991; 22:1374–1378.LinkGoogle Scholar26. Cai H, Li Z, Goette A, Mera F, Honeycutt C, Feterik K, et al. Downregulation of endocardial nitric oxide synthase expression and nitric oxide production in atrial fibrillation: potential mechanisms for atrial thrombosis and stroke.Circulation. 2002; 106:2854–2858.LinkGoogle Scholar27. Frustaci A, Chimenti C, Bellocci F, Morgante E, Russo MA, Mase
Referência(s)