PFO Closure for Cryptogenic Stroke: Review of New Data and Results
- 463 Downloads
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.
KeywordsPatent foramen ovale PFO occlude device Atrial septal aneurysm Cryptogenic stroke Stroke of undetermined cause Atrial fibrillation
Conflict of Interest
Dr. Shyam Rao reported no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.
Dr. Cathy Sila reported receiving grants from NMT and Aga-Medical.
References and Recommended Reading
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of great importance
- 2.•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. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.•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. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.••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. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Carroll JD. RESPECT: Late-breaking trial preview. TCT 2012; October 25, 2012; Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
- 28.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.Google Scholar
- 29.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.Google Scholar
- 31.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.Google Scholar