Muthiah Vaduganathan1, Arman Qamar1, Ankur Gupta1, Navkaranbir Bajaj1, Harsh B Golwala1, Ambarish Pandey2, Deepak L Bhatt3. 1. Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. 2. Division of Cardiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex. 3. Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. Electronic address: dlbhattmd@post.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patent foramen ovale closure represents a potential secondary prevention strategy for cryptogenic stroke, but available trials have varied by size, device studied, and follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of published randomized clinical trials evaluating patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy in patients with recent stroke or transient ischemic attack using PubMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane through September 2017. Weighting was by random effects models. RESULTS: Of 480 studies screened, we included 5 randomized clinical trials in the meta-analysis in which 3440 patients were randomized to patent foramen ovale closure (n = 1829) or medical therapy (n = 1611) and followed for an average of 2.0 to 5.9 years. Index stroke/transient ischemic attack occurred within 6 to 9 months of randomization. The primary end point was composite stroke/transient ischemic attack and death (in 3 trials) or stroke alone (in 2 trials). Patent foramen ovale closure reduced the primary end point (0.70 vs 1.48 events per 100 patient-years; risk ratio [RR], 0.52 [0.29-0.91]; I2 = 55.0%) and stroke/transient ischemic attack (1.04 vs 2.00 events per 100 patient-years; RR, 0.55 [0.37-0.82]; I2 = 42.2%) with modest heterogeneity compared with medical therapy. Procedural bleeding was not different between study arms (1.8% vs 1.8%; RR, 0.94 [0.49-1.83]; I2 = 29.2%), but new-onset atrial fibrillation/flutter was increased with patent foramen ovale closure (6.6% vs 0.7%; RR, 4.69 [2.17-10.12]; I2 = 29.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recent cryptogenic stroke, patent foramen ovale closure reduces recurrent stroke/transient ischemic attack compared with medical therapy, but is associated with a higher risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation/flutter.
BACKGROUND: Patent foramen ovale closure represents a potential secondary prevention strategy for cryptogenic stroke, but available trials have varied by size, device studied, and follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of published randomized clinical trials evaluating patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy in patients with recent stroke or transient ischemic attack using PubMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane through September 2017. Weighting was by random effects models. RESULTS: Of 480 studies screened, we included 5 randomized clinical trials in the meta-analysis in which 3440 patients were randomized to patent foramen ovale closure (n = 1829) or medical therapy (n = 1611) and followed for an average of 2.0 to 5.9 years. Index stroke/transient ischemic attack occurred within 6 to 9 months of randomization. The primary end point was composite stroke/transient ischemic attack and death (in 3 trials) or stroke alone (in 2 trials). Patent foramen ovale closure reduced the primary end point (0.70 vs 1.48 events per 100 patient-years; risk ratio [RR], 0.52 [0.29-0.91]; I2 = 55.0%) and stroke/transient ischemic attack (1.04 vs 2.00 events per 100 patient-years; RR, 0.55 [0.37-0.82]; I2 = 42.2%) with modest heterogeneity compared with medical therapy. Procedural bleeding was not different between study arms (1.8% vs 1.8%; RR, 0.94 [0.49-1.83]; I2 = 29.2%), but new-onset atrial fibrillation/flutter was increased with patent foramen ovale closure (6.6% vs 0.7%; RR, 4.69 [2.17-10.12]; I2 = 29.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recent cryptogenic stroke, patent foramen ovale closure reduces recurrent stroke/transient ischemic attack compared with medical therapy, but is associated with a higher risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation/flutter.
Authors: Anthony J Furlan; Mark Reisman; Joseph Massaro; Laura Mauri; Harold Adams; Gregory W Albers; Robert Felberg; Howard Herrmann; Saibal Kar; Michael Landzberg; Albert Raizner; Lawrence Wechsler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lars Søndergaard; Scott E Kasner; John F Rhodes; Grethe Andersen; Helle K Iversen; Jens E Nielsen-Kudsk; Magnus Settergren; Christina Sjöstrand; Risto O Roine; David Hildick-Smith; J David Spence; Lars Thomassen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; John D Carroll; David E Thaler; Richard W Smalling; Lee A MacDonald; David S Marks; David L Tirschwell Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bernhard Meier; Bindu Kalesan; Heinrich P Mattle; Ahmed A Khattab; David Hildick-Smith; Dariusz Dudek; Grethe Andersen; Reda Ibrahim; Gerhard Schuler; Antony S Walton; Andreas Wahl; Stephan Windecker; Peter Jüni Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Steven R Messé; Gary Gronseth; David M Kent; Jorge R Kizer; Shunichi Homma; Lee Rosterman; Scott E Kasner Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Hassan Mir; Reed Alexander C Siemieniuk; Long Ge; Farid Foroutan; Michael Fralick; Talha Syed; Luciane Cruz Lopes; Ton Kuijpers; Jean-Louis Mas; Per O Vandvik; Thomas Agoritsas; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-07-25 Impact factor: 2.692