Literature DB >> 29544871

Cryptogenic Stroke and High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale: The DEFENSE-PFO Trial.

Pil Hyung Lee1, Jae-Kwan Song2, Jong S Kim3, Ran Heo1, Sahmin Lee1, Dae-Hee Kim1, Jong-Min Song1, Duk-Hyun Kang1, Sun U Kwon3, Dong-Wha Kang3, Dongwhane Lee3, Hyuk Sung Kwon3, Sung-Cheol Yun4, Byung Joo Sun5, Jae-Hyeong Park5, Jae-Hwan Lee5, Hye Seon Jeong6, Hee-Jung Song6, Jei Kim6, Seung-Jung Park1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent reports showing the favorable role of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure in patients with cryptogenic stroke have raised the issue of selecting optimal candidates.
OBJECTIVES: This study, DEFENSE-PFO (Device Closure Versus Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke Patients With High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale), evaluated whether the benefits of PFO closure can be determined on the basis of the morphologic characteristics of the PFO, as evaluated by transesophageal echocardiography.
METHODS: Patients with cryptogenic stroke and high-risk PFO were divided between a transcatheter PFO closure and a medication-only group. High-risk PFO included PFO with atrial septal aneurysm, hypermobility (phasic septal excursion into either atrium ≥10 mm), or PFO size (maximum separation of the septum primum from the secundum) ≥2 mm. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, vascular death, or Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-defined major bleeding during 2 years of follow-up.
RESULTS: From September 2011 until October 2017, 120 patients (mean age: 51.8 years) underwent randomization. PFO size, frequency of septal aneurysm (13.3% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.56), and hypermobility (45.0% vs. 46.7%; p > 0.99) were similar between the groups. All PFO closures were successful. The primary endpoint occurred exclusively in the medication-only group (6 of 60 patients; 2-year event rate: 12.9% [log-rank p = 0.013]; 2-year rate of ischemic stroke: 10.5% [p = 0.023]). The events in the medication-only group included ischemic stroke (n = 5), cerebral hemorrhage (n = 1), Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction-defined major bleeding (n = 2), and transient ischemic attack (n = 1). Nonfatal procedural complications included development of atrial fibrillation (n = 2), pericardial effusion (n = 1), and pseudoaneurysm (n = 1).
CONCLUSIONS: PFO closure in patients with high-risk PFO characteristics resulted in a lower rate of the primary endpoint as well as stroke recurrence. (Device Closure Versus Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke Patients With High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale [DEFENSE-PFO]; NCT01550588).
Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cryptogenic stroke; echocardiography; patent foramen ovale

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29544871     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  75 in total

1.  Patent foramen ovale closure for patients excluded from the randomized cryptogenic stroke trials: response to letter by Zaman et al.

Authors:  Brunilda Alushi; Alexander Lauten; Ulf Landmesser; Adnan Kastrati
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.460

2.  Patent foramen ovale closure for patients excluded from the randomized cryptogenic stroke trials.

Authors:  Muhammad O Zaman; Nimesh K Patel; Mohammad K Mojadidi
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  [Closure of patent foramen ovale for cryptogenic stroke-"should be considered"!]

Authors:  J Röther; M Köhrmann; T Steiner; H Steinmetz
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 4.  [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 5.  [Patent foramen ovale-intervention or pharmaceutical treatment].

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

Review 6.  Patent foramen ovale: anatomical complexity and long-tunnel morphology related issues.

Authors:  Giampiero Vizzari; Fausto Pizzino; Dianne Zwicke; A Jamil Tajik; Scipione Carerj; Gianluca Di Bella; Antonio Micari; Bijoy K Khandheria; Concetta Zito
Journal:  Am J Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2021-06-15

Review 7.  Role of PFO Closure in Ischemic Stroke Prevention.

Authors:  Nicholas D Osteraas; Alejandro Vargas; Laurel Cherian; Sarah Song
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-11-14

Review 8.  Antithrombotic Therapy to Prevent Recurrent Strokes in Ischemic Cerebrovascular Disease: JACC Scientific Expert Panel.

Authors:  Victor J Del Brutto; Seemant Chaturvedi; Hans-Christoph Diener; Jose G Romano; Ralph L Sacco
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 9.  Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale and Cryptogenic Stroke: Unresolved Issues.

Authors:  Hans-Christoph Diener; Christian Gerloff; David E Thaler; Jochen Wöhrle
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 5.081

10.  Rivaroxaban or aspirin for patent foramen ovale and embolic stroke of undetermined source: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the NAVIGATE ESUS trial.

Authors:  Scott E Kasner; Balakumar Swaminathan; Pablo Lavados; Mukul Sharma; Keith Muir; Roland Veltkamp; Sebastian F Ameriso; Matthias Endres; Helmi Lutsep; Steven R Messé; J David Spence; Krassen Nedeltechev; Kanjana Perera; Gustavo Santo; Veronica Olavarria; Arne Lindgren; Shrikant Bangdiwala; Ashkan Shoamanesh; Scott D Berkowitz; Hardi Mundl; Stuart J Connolly; Robert G Hart
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 44.182

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.