PFO Closure for Cryptogenic Stroke: Review of New Data and Results
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Observational studies over 20 years have suggested that a patent foramen ovale (PFO) is an important cause of cryptogenic stroke in young individuals; case series and registries suggest that PFO closure confers superior protection from recurrent transient ischemic attack (TIA) and stroke. Recently completed randomized clinical trials did not confirm this hypothesis, but have provided reassurance that the risk of recurrent stroke is low at 1.5 %/yr. A target subset that may benefit are those with ischemic stroke, a large right-to-left shunt, and an atrial septal aneurysm. Further study is needed to determine the optimum strategy to reduce the long-term stroke risk in a lifetime of varying situational risk factors and temporary interruptions of medical therapies.
- Adams Jr HP, Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ, et al. Classification of subtypes of acute ischemic stroke: definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. Stroke. 1993;23:35–41. CrossRef
- Gordon DL, Bendixen BH, Adams Jr HP, et al. Interphysician agreement in the diagnosis of subtypes of acute ischemic stroke: implications for clinical trials. Neurology. 1993;42:1021–7. A classic article that illustrates the difficulty with classifying the etiology of stroke based on clinical and diagnostic criteria. CrossRef
- Foulkes MA, Wolf PA, Price TR. The stroke data bank: design, methods, and baseline characteristics. Stroke. 1988;19:547–54. CrossRef
- Bal S, Patel SK, Almekhlafi M. High rate of magnetic resonance imaging stroke recurrence in cryptogenic transient ischemic attack and minor stroke patients. Stroke. 2012;43:3387–8. CrossRef
- Ferrari J, Knoflach M, Kiechl S, et al. Early clinical worsening in patients with TIA or minor stroke. Neurology. 2010;74:136–41. CrossRef
- Silverman M. Paradoxical embolus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:930. CrossRef
- Srivastava TN, Payment MF. Paradoxical embolism. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:681. CrossRef
- Chan FP, Jones TR. Paradoxical embolus. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:803. CrossRef
- Lee JY, Song JK, Song JM, et al. Association between anatomic features of atrial septal abnormalities obtained by omni-plane transesophageal echocardiography and stroke recurrence in cryptogenic stroke patients with patent foramen ovale. Am J Cardiol. 2010;106:129–34. CrossRef
- Paciaroni M, Agnelli G, Bertolini A, et al. Risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack and patent foramen ovale: the FORI (Forman Ovale Registro Italiano) study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2011;31:109–16. CrossRef
- Harrer JU, Wessels T, Franke A, et al. Stroke recurrence and its prevention in patients with patent foramen ovale. Can J Neurol Sci. 2006;33:39–47.
- Cerrato P, Priano L, Imperiale D. Recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events in patients with intraatrial septal abnormalities: a followup study. Neurol Sci. 2006;26:411–8. CrossRef
- Faggiano P, Frattini S, Piovesana P, et al. Low cerebrovascular event rate in subjects with patent foramen ovale and different clinical presentations. Int J Cardiol. 2012;156:47–52. CrossRef
- Horner S, Niederkorn K, Gattringer T, et al. Management of right-to-left shunt in cryptogenic cerebrovascular disease: results from the observational Austrian paradoxical cerebral embolism trial (TACET) registry. J Neurol. 2012. doi:10.007/s00415-012-6629-9.
- Schuchlenz HW, Weihs W, Berghold A, et al. Secondary prevention after cryptogenic cerebrovascular events in patients with patent foramen ovale. Int J Cardiol. 2005;101:77–82. CrossRef
- Thanopoulos BD, Dardas PD, Karanasios E, et al. Transcatheter closure vs medical therapy of patient foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;68:741–6. CrossRef
- Wyngaert F, Kefer J, Hermans C, et al. Absence of recurrent stroke after percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale despite residual right-to-left cardiac shunt assessed by transcranial Doppler. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2008;101:435–41. CrossRef
- Wahl A, Juni P, Mono ML, et al. Long-term propensity score-matched comparison of percutaneous closure of patient foramen ovale with medical treatment after paradoxical embolism. Circulation. 2012;125:803–12. CrossRef
- Weimar C, Holle DN, Benemann J, et al. Current management and risk of recurrent stroke in cerebrovascular patients with right-to-left cardiac shunt. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2009;28:349–56. CrossRef
- Windecker S, Wahl A, Nedetchev K, et al. Comparison of medical treatment with percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:750–8. CrossRef
- Khairy P, O’Donnell CP, Landzberg MJ. Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and presumed paradoxical thromboemboli: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:753–60. CrossRef
- Slottow TL, Steinberg DH, Waksman R. Overview of the 2007 Food and Drug Administration Circulatory System Devices Panel Meeting on patent foramen ovale closure devices. Circulation. 2007;116:677–82. A glimpse into the FDA’s process data review and public comment in considering device approval. CrossRef
- O’Gara PT, Messe SR, Tuzcu EM, et al. Percutaneous device closure of patent foramen ovale for secondary stroke prevention: a call for completion of randomized clinical trials. A Science Advisory from the American Heart Association/ American Stroke Association and American College of Cardiology Foundation Expert Consensus Document. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:2014–8. CrossRef
- Johnston SC. Patent foramen ovale closure: closing the door except for trials. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1048–50. CrossRef
- Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J, et al. Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:991–9. The first completed randomized clinical trial of PFO closure vs. medical therapy for stroke prevention in young patients with a cryptogenic stroke and a PFO. CrossRef
- Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J, et al. A prospective multicenter, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the STARFlex septal closure system versus best medical therapy in patients with a stroke or transient ischemic attack due to presumed paradoxical embolism through a patent foramen ovale. Stroke. 2010;41:2872–83. CrossRef
- Carroll JD. RESPECT: Late-breaking trial preview. TCT 2012; October 25, 2012; Miami, Florida.
- Saver J. Late-breaking trial presentation. Qualifying and Outcome Strokes in the RESPECT PFO Trial: Additional Evidence of Treatment Effect. ISC 2013; February 7, 2013, Honolulu, Hawaii.
- John DC, Jeffrey LS, David ET, et al. Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1092–1100.
- Mohr JP, Thompson JL, Lazar RM, et al. A comparison of warfarin and aspirin for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1444–51. CrossRef
- Jung R, Kim BS, Masssaro J, et al. Baseline DWMRI characteristics in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale: results from the CLOSURE I Trial. Stroke. 2013;44:ATMP13.
- Messe SR, Silverman IE, Kizer JR, et al. Practice parameter: recurrent stroke with patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysm. Neurology. 2004;62:1042–50. CrossRef
- PFO Closure for Cryptogenic Stroke: Review of New Data and Results
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
Volume 15, Issue 3 , pp 360-371
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Current Science Inc.
- Additional Links
- Patent foramen ovale
- PFO occlude device
- Atrial septal aneurysm
- Cryptogenic stroke
- Stroke of undetermined cause
- Atrial fibrillation
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Internal Medicine, Fairview Hospital, 18200 Lorain Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44111, USA
- 2. Comprehensive Stroke Center, University Hospitals - Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
- 3. Department Neurology, Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Avenue / HAN 5040, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA