September 19, 2020
Supplementary Materialsijms-20-00730-s001. CIMT was considerably larger in AF than in ESUS patients ( 0.001), and was identified as an AF risk factor independent from CHA2DS2VASC in the regression analysis (= 0.014). These findings may support future stratification for AF risk in patients who have suffered embolic stroke. = 25) 0.05 was considered significant (bold). 2.2. Plasma Dimethylarginine Levels in Ischemic Stroke of Different Causes Significant group differences were discovered using the KruskalCWallis check for SDMA amounts (= 0.018), L-arginine/ADMA proportion (= 0.045), and L-arginine/SDMA proportion (= 0.016). Intergroup distinctions were within evaluation of ESUS with AF altogether and with recently diagnosed AF relating to L-arginine, SDMA, L-arginine/ADMA proportion, L-arginine/SDMA proportion, and ADMA/SDMA proportion (see Desk 2). Desk 2 Evaluation of Dimethylarginines and Carotid IntimaCMedia Width (CIMT) between ESUS and AF. = 0.03 74.40= 0.031 ADMA (mol/L) = 0.2230.50= 0.26SDMA (mol/L) = 0.026 0.58= 0.004 L-arginine/ADMA ratio = 0.009 148.64= 0.006 L-arginine/SDMA ratio = 0.004 118.03= 0.002 ADMA/SDMA ratio= 0.046 0.83= 0.013 CIMT (mm) = 0.001 0.85 0.001 Open up in another window 0.05 was thought to be significant (bold). Evaluation of ESUS with angiopathic strokes demonstrated significant differences solely regarding SDMA (= 0.037), with SDMA amounts being higher in angiopathic strokes. There have been no significant differences between AF altogether and angiopathic strokes regarding dimethylarginines or L-arginine. 2.3. L-arginine/SDMA Proportion being a Potential Marker for Identifying AF in Sufferers Admitted with ESUS As the L-arginine/SDMA proportion ended up being especially different between ESUS and AF sufferers (Body 1), this parameter was additional examined using backwards binary logistic regression. Within an evaluation including L-arginine/SDMA proportion, CHA2DS2VASC (being a amalgamated score including age group, sex, and thrombembolic risk elements), NIHSS, and serum creatinine, L-arginine/SDMA proportion AUT1 was found never to be independently AUT1 connected with recently diagnosed AF using a staying difference by propensity (= 0.099), whereas CHA2DS2VASC demonstrated significantly different (= 0.02). Recipient operating quality (ROC) evaluation uncovered moderate discriminability of AF and ESUS through the L-arginine/SDMA proportion with a location beneath the curve (AUC) of 0.732 (95% CI: 0.610C0.854) (Body 2A). Open up in another window Body 1 Group differences of L-arginine/SDMA ratio. AF AUT1 (total) subsumes previously and newly diagnosed AF. * 0.05 ** 0.01; n.s.: not significant. Open in a separate window Physique 2 ROC analysis of L-arginine/SDMA ratio (A) and CIMT (B) as distinguishing markers between AF and ESUS patients. a: AUC: 0.732; (95% CI: 0.610C0.854; = 0.002); b: AUC: 0.807 (95% CI: 0.704C0.910; 0.001). In patients who underwent transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) there was no significant difference between patients with (= 15) or without diagnosis of patent foramen ovale (PFO) (= 29) regarding dimethylarginines or CIMT (data not shown). Also, in the subgroup analysis of ESUS patients, there were no significant differences between these groups (= 10 vs. = 21). 2.4. Carotid IntimaCMedia Thickness Differs between Patients with ESUS and Other Etiologies For group comparison of CIMT, see Table 2. Patients with known, newly diagnosed AF and all patients with AF showed significantly higher values of CIMT than patients with ESUS ( 0.001, = 0.001, and 0.001, respectively). Moreover, patients with angiopathic strokes had significantly thicker CIMT than ESUS patients (= 0.021) (Physique 3). Open in a separate window Physique 3 Group differences in CIMT. AF (total) subsumes previously and newly diagnosed AF. * 0.05; 0.01; 0.001. Including CHA2DS2VASC, binary logistic regression revealed an independent association of CIMT with AF in the whole cohort (= 0.014) and a non-significant trend considering newly diagnosed AF patients (= 0.06). ROC analysis showed a good discriminability of AF and ESUS through CIMT with an AUC of 0.807 (95% CI: 0.704C0.910) (Figure 2B). At a CIMT cutoff of 0.7 mm, the sensitivity was 84% and the specificity ITGB4 was 60.5%; at a cutoff of 0.8 mm, the sensitivity was 60% and the specificity was 83.7%. 2.5. Markers of Endothelial Dysfunction and Thrombembolic Risk Within the whole study.