Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Which treatment for patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke?

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

The management of a patient with a cryptogenic stroke and a patent foramen ovale (PFO) depends on the existence of identifiable causes of stroke, on the PFO characteristics, on the characteristics of the patient, on the contraindications to antithrombotic therapy, and on the preference of the patient. There is no consensus on the management of a patient with a cryptogenic stroke and a PFO, but the algorithm presented in this article seems reasonable to these authors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Di Tullio M, Sacco RL, Gopal A, et al.: Patent foramen ovale as risk factor for cryptogenic stroke. Ann Intern Med 1992, 117:461–465.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Messe SR, Silverman IE, Kizer JR, et al.: Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Practice parameter: recurrent stroke with patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysm: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2004, 62:1042–1050. Cochrane database of systematic reviews aimed at assessing the risk of subsequent stroke or death in patients with a cryptogenic stroke and a PFO and establishing the optimal method of stroke prevention. A rigorous methodologic evidence-based medicine analysis, giving for each study a level of evidence.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hagen PT, Scholz DG, Edwards WD: Incidence and size of patent foramen ovale during the first 10 decades of life: an autopsy study of 965 normal hearts. Mayo Clinic Proc 1984, 59:17–20.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wu LA, Malouf JF, Dearani JA, et al.: Patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke: current understanding and management options. Arch Intern Med 2004, 164:950–956. From a review of the literature, determination of a diagnostic and treatment algorithm for patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke. Because there is no consensus, all therapeutic options are discussed according to the patient and associated risk factors.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cabanes L, Coste J, Derumeaux G, et al.: Interobserver and intraobserver variability in detection of patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysm with transesophageal echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2002, 15:441–446.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Overell JR, Bone I, Lees KR: Interatrial septal abnormalities and stroke: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. Neurology 2000, 55:1172–1179. A meta-analysis from case-control studies that examined the relative frequency of PFO in all patients with cryptogenic stroke, showing that it is significantly associated with ischemic stroke in patients younger than 55 years.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Homma S, Sacco RL, Di Tullio MR, et al.: Effect of medical treatment in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale: patent foramen ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke Study. Circulation 2002, 105:2625–2631. A prospective, nonrandomized study including 630 stroke patients with PFO, of whom 312 (49.5%) were randomized to warfarin and 318 (50.5%) to aspirin. There was no significant difference in the risk of subsequent stroke and death between the two groups.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Orgera MA, O’Malley PG, Taylor AJ: Secondary prevention of cerebral ischemia in patent foramen ovale: systematic review and meta-analysis. South Med J 2001, 94:699–703.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Windecker S, Wahl A, Nedeltchev K, et al.: Comparison of medical treatment with percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:750–758. A prospective, nonrandomized study comparing patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke treated medically (158 patients) or by percutaneous PFO closure (150 patients).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bogousslavsky J, Garazi S, Jeanrenaud X, et al.: Stroke recurrence in patients with patent foramen ovale: the Lausanne Study. Lausanne Stroke with Paradoxical Embolism Study Group. Neurology 1996, 46:1301–1305.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Krumsdorf U, Ostermayer S, Billinger K, et al.: Incidence and clinical course of thrombus formation on atrial septal defect and patient foramen ovale closure devices in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 43:155–315. To investigate the clinical course of thrombus formation after catheter closure of PFO in patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Windecker S, Wahl A, Chatterjee T, et al.: Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with paradoxical embolism. Long-term risk of recurrent thromboembolic events. Circulation 2000, 101:893–898. An experience of the long-term risk of recurrent thromboembolic events in 80 patients with PFO and paradoxical embolism after percutaneous PFO closure using five different devices.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Baker SS, O’Laughin MP, Jollis JG, et al.: Cost implications of closure of atrial septal defects. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002, 55:83–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Homma S, Tullio MR, Sacco RL, et al.: Surgical closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke patients. Stroke 1997, 28:2376–2381.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nendaz M, Sarasin F, Bogousslavsky J: How to prevent stroke recurrence in patients with patent foramen ovale: anticoagulants, antiaggregants, foramen closure or nothing? Eur Neurol 1997, 37:199–204.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Dearani JA, Ugurlu BS, Danielson GK, et al.: Surgical patent foramen ovale closure for prevention of paradoxical embolism-related cerebrovascular ischemic events. Circulation 1999, 100(19 suppl):II171-II175.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinique Thérapeutique, Hôpital Lariboisiére, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010, Paris, France

    Isabelle Mahé MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Isabelle Mahé MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles Caulin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean-François Bergmann MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mahé, I., Caulin, C. & Bergmann, JF. Which treatment for patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke?. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 7, 179–185 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-005-0046-7

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-005-0046-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation