Analysis of stroke subtypes is important for making treatment decisions and prognostic evaluations. The TOAST classification system is most commonly used, but the CCS and ASCO classification systems might be more useful to identify stroke etiologies in young patients whose strokes have a wide range of different causes. In this manuscript, we aim to compare the differences in subtype classification between TOAST, CCS, and ASCO in young stroke patients. The TOAST, CCS, and ASCO classification schemes were applied to 151 patients with ischemic stroke aged 18–49 years old and the proportion of subtypes classified by each scheme was compared. For comparison, determined etiologies were defined as cases with evident and probable subtypes when using the CCS scheme and cases with grade 1 and 2 subtypes but no other grade 1 subtype when using the ASCO scheme. The McNemar test with Bonferroni correction was used to assess significance. By TOAST, 41.1% of patients’ stroke etiology was classified as undetermined etiology, 19.2% as cardioembolic, 13.2% as large artery atherosclerosis, 11.3% as small vessel occlusion, and 15.2% as other causes. Compared with TOAST, both CCS and ASCO assigned fewer patients to the undetermined etiology group (30.5% p < 0.001 and 26.5% p < 0.001, respectively) and assigned more patients to the small vessel occlusion category (19.9%, p < 0.001, and 21.9%, p < 0.001, respectively). Additionally, both schemes assigned more patients to the large artery atherosclerosis group (15.9 and 16.6%, respectively). The proportion of patients assigned to either the cardioembolic or the other causes etiology did not differ significantly between the three schemes. Application of the CCS and ASCO classification schemes in young stroke patients seems feasible, and using both schemes may result in fewer patients being classified as undetermined etiology. New studies with more patients and a prospective design are needed to explore this topic further.
Acta Neurologica Belgica – Springer Journals
Published: Jul 8, 2017
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera