Literature DB >> 29310136

Device Closure Versus Medical Therapy Alone for Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients With Cryptogenic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Rahman Shah1, Mannu Nayyar1, Ion S Jovin2, Abdul Rashid3, Beatrix R Bondy1, Tai-Hwang M Fan1, Michael P Flaherty4, Sunil V Rao5.   

Abstract

Background: The optimal strategy for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is unknown. Purpose: To compare transcatheter PFO closure with medical therapy alone for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke. Data Sources: PubMed and the Cochrane Library (without language restrictions) from inception to October 2017, reference lists, and abstracts from cardiology meetings. Study Selection: Randomized trials enrolling adults with PFO and cryptogenic stroke that compared stroke outcomes (main outcome) and potential harms in those receiving transcatheter device closure versus medical therapy alone. Data Extraction: Two investigators independently extracted study data and rated risk of bias. Data Synthesis: Of 5 trials, 1 was excluded because it used a device that is no longer available due to high rates of complications and failure. Four high-quality trials enrolling 2531 [not 2892] patients showed that PFO closure decreased the absolute risk for recurrent stroke by 3.3% [not 3.2%] (risk difference [RD], −0.033 [95% CI, −0.062 to −0.004]) [not −0.032 (95% CI, −0.050 to −0.014)] compared with medical therapy. The treatment strategies did not differ in rates of transient ischemic attack or major bleeding. Closure of PFOs was associated with higher rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) than medical therapy alone in all trials, but this outcome had marked between-trial heterogeneity (I2 = 81.9%), and high event rates in some groups resulted in extreme values for CIs. Limitation: Heterogeneity of device type and antithrombotic therapy across trials, small numbers for some outcomes, and heterogeneous and inconclusive AF results.
Conclusion: In patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke, transcatheter device closure decreases risk for recurrent stroke compared with medical therapy alone. Because recurrent stroke rates are low even with medical therapy alone and PFO closure might affect AF risk, shared decision making is crucial for this treatment. Primary Funding Source: None.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29310136     DOI: 10.7326/M17-2679

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  20 in total

Review 1.  [Cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale : S2e guidelines].

Authors:  Hans-Christoph Diener; Armin J Grau; Stephan Baldus; Alexander Ghanem; Klaus Gröschel; Christoph Liebetrau; Steffen Massberg; Helge Möllmann; Holger Nef; Dirk Sander; Christian Weimar; Jochen Wöhrle; Heinrich Mattle
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 2.  [Patent foramen ovale-intervention or pharmaceutical treatment].

Authors:  C Liebetrau; C W Hamm
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 0.743

3.  PFO closure for secondary stroke prevention: is the discussion closed?

Authors:  Joseph J Shatzel; Molly M Daughety; Vinay Prasad; Thomas G DeLoughery
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  Patent foramen ovale closure for patients with cryptogenic stroke: A systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials and 14 observational studies.

Authors:  Xi Chen; Shi-Dong Chen; Yi Dong; Qiang Dong
Journal:  CNS Neurosci Ther       Date:  2018-05-27       Impact factor: 5.243

Review 5.  Patent foramen ovale closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic ischemic stroke: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Volker Schulze; Yingfeng Lin; Athanasios Karathanos; Maximilian Brockmeyer; Tobias Zeus; Amin Polzin; Stefan Perings; Malte Kelm; Georg Wolff
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Prevention of Patent Foramen Ovale-Related Stroke: An Evolving Concept.

Authors:  Marco R Di Tullio
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  A Case of Recurrent Embolic Strokes in a Young Female With a Patent Foramen Ovale and Presumed Fibroelastoma.

Authors:  Nardine Abdelsayed; Kevin Parza; Mohamed Faris
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-07-10

Review 8.  Physiological fetal vascular shunts and failure to regress: what the radiologist needs to know.

Authors:  Michael A Leshen; Rajiv Devanagondi; David Saul; Apeksha Chaturvedi
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2022-02-15

9.  Secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Elisa Maria Fiorelli; Tiziana Carandini; Delia Gagliardi; Viviana Bozzano; Mattia Bonzi; Eleonora Tobaldini; Giacomo Pietro Comi; Elio Angelo Scarpini; Nicola Montano; Monica Solbiati
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-07-21       Impact factor: 3.397

10.  EACVI survey on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke.

Authors:  Antonello D'Andrea; Marc R Dweck; Espen Holte; Ricardo Fontes-Carvalho; Matteo Cameli; Hatem Soliman Aboumarie; Hans Christoph Diener; Kristina H Haugaa
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 6.875

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.