Babikir Kheiri1, Ahmed Abdalla2, Mohammed Osman2, Sahar Ahmed2, Mustafa Hassan2, Ghassan Bachuwa2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Hurley Medical Center, Michigan State University, United States. babikir.kheiri@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Hurley Medical Center, Michigan State University, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cryptogenic strokes can be attributed to paradoxical emboli through patent foramen ovale (PFO). However, the effectiveness of PFO closure in preventing recurrent stroke is uncertain and the results of previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been inconclusive. Hence, this study pro- vides an updated meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing PFO closure with medical therapy for secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke. METHODS: All RCTs were identified by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Clinicaltrials.gov. The primary outcome was recurrent ischemic stroke and secondary outcomes were transient ischemic at- tack (TIA), all-cause mortality, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF), serious adverse events, and major bleeding. RESULTS: Five RCTs with 3440 participants were included in the present study (1829 patients under- went PFO closure and 1611 were treated medically). Pooled analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in the rate of recurrent stroke with PFO closure in comparison to medical therapy (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.90; p = 0.03). However, there were no statistically significant reductions of recurrent TIAs (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.51-1.14; p = 0.19) or all-cause mortality (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.35-1.65; p = 0.48). The risk of developing new-onset AF was increased significantly with PFO closure (OR 4.74; 95% CI 2.33-9.61; p < 0.0001), but no significant differences in terms of serious adverse events or major bleeding between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patent foramen ovale closure in adults with recent cryptogenic stroke was associated with a lower rate of recurrent strokes in comparison with medical therapy alone.
BACKGROUND: Cryptogenic strokes can be attributed to paradoxical emboli through patent foramen ovale (PFO). However, the effectiveness of PFO closure in preventing recurrent stroke is uncertain and the results of previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been inconclusive. Hence, this study pro- vides an updated meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing PFO closure with medical therapy for secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke. METHODS: All RCTs were identified by a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Clinicaltrials.gov. The primary outcome was recurrent ischemic stroke and secondary outcomes were transient ischemic at- tack (TIA), all-cause mortality, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF), serious adverse events, and major bleeding. RESULTS: Five RCTs with 3440 participants were included in the present study (1829 patients under- went PFO closure and 1611 were treated medically). Pooled analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in the rate of recurrent stroke with PFO closure in comparison to medical therapy (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.90; p = 0.03). However, there were no statistically significant reductions of recurrent TIAs (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.51-1.14; p = 0.19) or all-cause mortality (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.35-1.65; p = 0.48). The risk of developing new-onset AF was increased significantly with PFO closure (OR 4.74; 95% CI 2.33-9.61; p < 0.0001), but no significant differences in terms of serious adverse events or major bleeding between both groups. CONCLUSIONS:Patent foramen ovale closure in adults with recent cryptogenic stroke was associated with a lower rate of recurrent strokes in comparison with medical therapy alone.
Authors: Jacob A Udell; Alexander R Opotowsky; Paul Khairy; Candice K Silversides; David J Gladstone; Patrick T O'Gara; Michael J Landzberg Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 5.223
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: Stroke Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Christopher G Favilla; Erin Ingala; Jenny Jara; Emily Fessler; Brett Cucchiara; Steven R Messé; Michael T Mullen; Allyson Prasad; James Siegler; Mathew D Hutchinson; Scott E Kasner Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Walter N Kernan; Bruce Ovbiagele; Henry R Black; Dawn M Bravata; Marc I Chimowitz; Michael D Ezekowitz; Margaret C Fang; Marc Fisher; Karen L Furie; Donald V Heck; S Claiborne Clay Johnston; Scott E Kasner; Steven J Kittner; Pamela H Mitchell; Michael W Rich; DeJuran Richardson; Lee H Schwamm; John A Wilson Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Tommaso Sanna; Hans-Christoph Diener; Rod S Passman; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Richard A Bernstein; Carlos A Morillo; Marilyn Mollman Rymer; Vincent Thijs; Tyson Rogers; Frank Beckers; Kate Lindborg; Johannes Brachmann Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jukka Putaala; Antti J Metso; Tiina M Metso; Nina Konkola; Yvonn Kraemer; Elena Haapaniemi; Markku Kaste; Turgut Tatlisumak Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-02-26 Impact factor: 7.914