Literature DB >> 26056962

Recurrent stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale: An observational prospective study of percutaneous closure of PFO versus non-closure.

Naqibullah Mirzada1, Per Ladenvall2, Per-Olof Hansson2, Peter Eriksson2, Mikael Dellborg2.   

Abstract

AIMS: Observational studies favor percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) over medical therapy to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke, whereas randomized clinical trials have not shown significant differences. This study aims to compare long-term outcomes of PFO closure versus non-closure. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Patients with PFO and stroke considered for PFO closure were invited to a long-term clinical follow-up. Of the 314 patients, 151 (48%) were accepted for closure and 163 (52%) were not accepted (mean age 50 vs. 58 years). The cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality, stroke or transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) for closure vs. non-closure under a mean follow-up time of five years was 10.6% (16 events) vs. 12.9% (21 events), p=0.53. Six patients, 3.7% vs. 3.6%, died in each group, but no deaths were associated with PFO closure, recurrent stroke or TIA. The incidence of recurrent stroke or TIA for closure vs. non-closure was 6.6% (10 events) vs. 9.2% (15 events), p=0.63. The respective event rates for stroke were 3.9% (6 events) vs. 5.5% (9 events), p=0.50 and for TIA, 2.6% (4 events) vs. 3.7% (6 events), p=0.59.
CONCLUSION: PFO closure was associated with a low risk of recurrent events; however, compared to the non-closure group, no significant differences could be demonstrated. Careful patient selection can avoid under- as well as over-treatment of PFO patients.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cryptogenic stroke; PFO closure; Patent foramen ovale (PFO)

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26056962     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  4 in total

1.  How often is patent foramen ovale an innocent bystander?

Authors:  Francesco Versaci; Giampiero Vizzari; Domenico Sergi; Giuseppe Andò; Antonio Trivisonno; Francesco Romeo
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2017-10-26

2.  Percutaneous closure versus medical therapy for stroke with patent foramen Ovale: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xin-Lin Zhang; Li-Na Kang; Lian Wang; Biao Xu
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 3.  Patent foramen ovale and atrial fibrillation as causes of cryptogenic stroke: is treatment with surgery superior to device closure and anticoagulation? A review of the literature.

Authors:  Thomas Kjeld; Tem S Jørgensen; Gitte Fornitz; Jan Roland; Henrik C Arendrup
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2018-08-23

4.  Patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for stroke prevention: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Gary Tse; William K K Wu; Jenny Chi Ling Lai; Mengqi Gong; George Bazoukis; Wing Tak Wong; Sunny Hei Wong; Konstantinos Lampropoulos; Adrian Baranchuk; Lap Ah Tse; Yunlong Xia; Guangping Li; Martin C S Wong; Yat Sun Chan; Nan Mu; Mei Dong; Tong Liu
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-12-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.