Abstract TP302: Single and Combination Antithrombotics for Secondary Prevention in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source: Secondary Analysis of the CASPR Registry
Authors: Aboul-Nour Hassan , Thompson Sean , Glover Patrick , Daniel Jean-Philippe , Yaghi Shadi , Ro Jennifer , Aziz Yasmin , Kirchhoffer Kaitlyn , Kam Wayneho , Leung Lester , Sloane Kelly , Heaton Sharon , Almallouhi Eyad , Fernandez Albert , Dumitrascu Oana , Culbertson Collin , Gaudio Elizabeth , Elangovan Cheran , Chahien Dalia , Kathleen Murphy , Farooqui Mudassir , Chen Lucia , Shahrivari Mahan , D'Souza Marissa , Stamm Brian , Khezri Nicole , Stretz Christoph , Nguyen Thanh , Siegler James , Rojas-Soto Diana , Salehi Omran Setareh , Jillella Dinesh , Nahab Fadi 
Published: January 2025

Background:
Multiple randomized clinical trials failed to show benefit of anticoagulation over antiplatelets in the secondary prevention for embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). However, the benefit of combination antithrombotic regimens remains unexplored in the same patient population.

Methods:
This is a subgroup analysis of a multicenter retrospective observational cohort of consecutive adult patients with ESUS (n=27 sites, 2015-2024). Comparisons were made between patients treated with single (SAPT) or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), exclusive anticoagulation (AC) (direct oral anticoagulant, vitamin K antagonist, low molecular weight heparin) and combination anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy initiated within the first 7 days of index stroke. The primary composite outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke, major bleeding, or death was assessed using unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression. Secondary outcomes were individual outcomes of recurrent ischemic stroke, major bleeding, or death.

Results:
Of the 2201 included patients, 1456 (66.1%) were on SAPT, 527 (23.9%) were on DAPT, 195 (8.8%) were on exclusive AC and 23 (1.0%) were on AC+AP (all of which were on DAPT). Patients treated with AC+AP were older (median 66 years [IQR 51-78]), more likely to have history of hypertension, stroke, hyperlipidemia, PFO and left atrial enlargement. Compared to SAPT, all treatment strategies were associated with similar risk of the primary outcomes in the unadjusted and adjusted cox regression. Similarly, there was no difference in individual outcomes including recurrent stroke, major bleeding and death in the adjusted cox regression. However, there was an increased risk of major bleeding with AC+AP in the unadjusted cox regression (HR 4.0, [95% CI 1.2-12.8], p=0.02) but not in the adjusted model when compared to SAPT. Also, DAPT was associated with lower risk of death than SAPT in the unadjusted model (HR 0.61 [95% CI 0.4-0.8],p=0.005) but not the adjusted model. Additionally, when adjusted by the HASBLED score, there was no difference in major bleeding when AC+AP was compared to SAPT.

Conclusion:
Over 90% of ESUS patients in this cohort were prescribed SAPT or DAPT. Antithrombotic therapy with DAPT, exclusive AC, or AC+AP was not associated with any lower risk of recurrent ischemic stroke, major bleeding and death compared with SAPT in an unselected cohort of ESUS patients.