Recurrent Stroke Reduction with Patent Foramen Ovale Closure versus Medical Therapy Based on Patent Foramen Ovale Characteristics: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Secondary Prevention of Cryptogenic Stroke and Outcomes Following Surgical Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Plus Medical Therapy vs. Medical Therapy Alone: An Umbrella Meta-Analysis of Eight Meta-Analyses Covering Seventeen Countries

Background

Cryptogenic stroke (CS) is an exclusion diagnosis that accounts for 10-40% of all ischemic strokes. Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is found in 66% of patients with CS, while having a prevalence of 25-30% in the general population. The primary aim was to evaluate the risk of recurrent stroke following surgical PFO closure plus medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone amongst CS, an embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS), or transient ischemic attack (TIA). The secondary aim was to evaluate new-onset non-valvular atrial fibrillation, mortality, and major bleeding.

Methods

We conducted an umbrella meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines on English studies comparing surgical PFO closure plus medical therapy versus medical therapy alone for managing CS. We extracted data on interventions and outcomes and used random-effects models with generic inverse variance to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals for outcome calculations.

Results

A comprehensive search yielded 54,729 articles on CS and 65,001 on surgical PFO closure, with 1,591 studies focusing on PFO closure and medical therapy for secondary CS, ESUS, or TIA prevention. After excluding non-meta-analyses, 52 eligible meta-analyses were identified, and eight studies were selected for outcome evaluation, excluding non-English, non-human, and studies before January 2019 as of August 31, 2021. Among a total of 41,880 patients, 14,942 received PFO closure + medical therapy, while 26,938 patients received medical therapy alone. Our umbrella meta-analysis showed that PFO closure plus medical therapy had a 64% lower risk of recurrent strokes than medical therapy alone (pooled RR: 0.36). PFO closure plus medical therapy was associated with 4.94 times higher risk of atrial fibrillation. There was no difference in the risk of death or bleeding between both groups.

Conclusion

In patients with CS, PFO closure, in addition to medical therapy, reduces the risk of recurrence. More research is needed to assess the efficacy of early closure as well as specific risk profiles that would benefit from early intervention to reduce the burden of stroke.

Cerebrovascular Events in Older Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure, along with medical therapy, has emerged as the therapeutic gold standard in younger (<60-year-old) patients with a PFO-related stroke for preventing recurrent events. However, PFO management guidelines lack definite recommendations for older (>60 years) patients with a PFO-related cerebrovascular event, a complex group of patients who were mostly excluded from PFO closure clinical trials. Nevertheless, several studies have shown a higher prevalence of PFO among older patients with cryptogenic stroke, and its presence has been associated with an increased risk of recurrent events. Furthermore, older patients exhibit a higher prevalence of high-risk PFO anatomical features, present inherent age-related risk factors that might increase the risk of paradoxical embolism through a PFO, and have a higher incidence of ischemic events after a PFO-related event. Additionally, observational studies have shown the safety and preliminary efficacy of PFO closure in older PFO-related stroke patients. Yet, higher rates of recurrent cerebrovascular events and new-onset atrial fibrillation were observed in some studies among older patients compared to their younger counterparts. After careful case-by-case evaluation, including the assessment of hidden potential cardioembolic sources of a cryptogenic stroke other than PFO, transcatheter PFO closure might be a safe and effective therapeutic option for preventing recurrent thromboembolic events in patients >60 years with a high-risk PFO-associated stroke. Ongoing trials will provide important insights into the role of PFO closure in the elderly population.

Effect of Interventional Therapy Unexplained Dizziness and Relationship Between Dizziness Handicap Inventory and Right-to-Left Shunt Grading

Objective

Unexplained dizziness remains a clinical challenge. Our previous studies have shown that unexplained dizziness may be related to patent foramen ovale (PFO). This study aims to explore whether the degree of shunt is correlated with the degree of unexplained dizziness and looking for the possible clinical intervention for patients with unexplained dizziness.

Methods

This study was a large single-center, prospective, controlled study. From March 2019 to March 2022, patients with unexplained dizziness and explained dizziness and healthy controls were recruited. Contrast-enhanced transcranial Doppler sonography (c-TCD) was performed to detect the existence of right-to-left shunt (RLS) and shunt grading. The dizziness handicap inventory (DHI) was completed to evaluate the dizziness. Unexplained dizziness patients with large amount of PFO were volunteered to receive medication treatment and transcatheter PFO closure and followed up six months.

Results

A total of 387 patients (132 unexplained, 123 explained and 132 controls) were enrolled. There was a statistical difference in the RLS grading with three groups (p < 0.001). The Spearman correlation coefficient of RLS grading and DHI scores in unexplained dizziness patients (r=0.122, p=0.163) and explained dizziness patients (r=0.067, p=0.460). In the unexplained group, there were 49 cases with massive grading RLS. Of which 25 patients received percutaneous PFO closure treatment and 24 cases received medication treatment. Followed up six months after treatment, the amount of DHI scores change in patients who received the percutaneous PFO closure was significantly higher than that in the medication treatment group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

RLS may play an important role in unexplained dizziness. For unexplained dizziness patients, PFO closure may contribute to better outcomes. In the future, large-scale randomized controlled studies are still needed.

Stroke Prevention in Patients with Patent Foramen Ovale

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is widely prevalent and studies have suggested an association with ischemic stroke. In this review, we aim to highlight current management of patients with ischemic stroke in the setting of PFO and discuss some areas of controversy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Upon reviewing the literature, we have found that the evidence regarding the management of patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO has come a long way in the past several years, and many uncertainties remain in clinical practice. The Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score helps to predict the probability of a pathogenic PFO, and recent trial data confirms the benefit of closure in carefully selected patients. The benefit of closure in older patients and in patients with alternate, competing mechanisms is still uncertain, and the long-term risks of closure are not known. Finally, the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this patient population as compared to other medical therapy or mechanical closure has not yet been investigated. Randomized data is needed to help answer these questions. PFO closure is a safe and effective strategy in reducing stroke risk in carefully selected patients with cryptogenic stroke in the setting of a PFO. More studies are needed to test optimal medical treatment strategies and the safety and efficacy of PFO closure in patient subgroups not included in prior PFO closure trials.

Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy for patent foramen ovale (PFO) patients with cryptic stroke remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PFO closure versus different types of medical therapy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary efficacy endpoints were the composite outcome of recurrent stroke and/or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Secondary efficacy endpoints included separate stroke and TIA. Safety endpoints included new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter and bleeding.

RESULTS

Compared with antiplatelet therapy, PFO closure significantly reduced the risk of composite outcome (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.51), stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13-0.36], and TIA (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34-0.98); Compared with the mixed medical therapy group (consist of antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulant therapy, or both), PFO closure still showed some benefits, but the effect was not as significant as that of antiplatelet therapy (composite outcome: OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41-0.69; stroke: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34-0.68; TIA: OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.96); Compared with anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure showed no benefit (composite outcome: OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46-1.28; stroke: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28-1.25; TIA: OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.50-2.04). In terms of safe endpoints, compared with antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 9.56, 95% CI 2.85-32.06; OR 18.96, 95% CI 1.11-323.8, respectively) and reduced the risk of bleeding (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24-1.05; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.46, respectively); compared with mixed medical therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 4.40,95% CI 2.24-8.67), but there was no difference in bleeding (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56-1.68).

CONCLUSIONS

With the addition of anticoagulants, the benefit of PFO closure decreased gradually. Patient groups that adopt individualized medical therapy strategies may benefit more.

Device closure for patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke: which patients should get it?

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) and cryptogenic stroke (CS) both have a high prevalence. The optimal treatment to reduce stroke recurrence after CS remains controversial. Results from clinical trials, meta-analyses, and position papers, support percutaneous PFO device closure and medical therapy compared to medical therapy alone. However, the procedure may be associated with cardiac complications including an increased incidence of new atrial fibrillation. The benefit/risk balance should be determined on a case-by-case basis with the greatest benefit of PFO closure in patients with atrial septal aneurysm and PFO with large shunts. Future studies should address unsolved questions such as the choice of medical therapy in patients not undergoing closure, the duration of antiplatelet therapy, and the role of PFO closure in patients over 60 years old.

Patent foramen ovale closure in the management of cryptogenic stroke: a review of current literature and guideline statements

OBJECTIVE

The management recommendations for patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure in cryptogenic stroke are rapidly evolving. The data has expanded recently with four major trials demonstrating superiority of percutaneous device closure over medical management in preventing cryptogenic stroke recurrence. This paper aims to review the current literature for referring physicians who may encounter patients with patent foramen ovale before referring these patients to stroke specialists and/or interventional cardiologists.

METHOD

For this Narrative review, we conducted a broad literature search with expert selection of relevant data. Our search included a review of the currently available trials, guideline statements, position papers, cost-effectiveness of device closure data, as well as the impact of device closure on quality of life.

RESULTS

Most European societies are now in favor of evaluating all patients aged 60 years or younger with recent cryptogenic stroke in the setting of a PFO after careful consideration of the patient's echocardiographic and clinical risk factors. On the other hand, American societies, except for the American Academy of Neurology, have not yet passed official updated recommendations.

CONCLUSION

PFO closure can be considered for the prevention of recurrent cryptogenic stroke in patients aged ≤60 years after a thorough evaluation and discussion about benefits and potential risks (including but not limited to atrial fibrillation) of the procedure. Accumulating evidence supports prognostic, quality of life, and economic benefit from percutaneous PFO closure with newer generation closure devices in the right subset of patients.

HIGHLIGHTS

Data from 4 major trials (RESPECT, CLOSE, DEFENSE-PFO, REDUCE) demonstrates the superiority of PFO closure over medical management alone in preventing cryptogenic stroke recurrence. Trials investigated mostly patients ≤60 years old, and therefore results may not be generalizable to the entire population. Further randomized trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of PFO closure in patients older than 60 years are warranted.Atrial fibrillation is one of the most common "occult" causes of cryptogenic stroke and should be excluded by ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring. It is important to also rule out other causes of stroke, including hypercoagulable states, atherosclerotic lesions, other cardioembolic sources, and arterial dissection.Complications of PFO procedure include new-onset AF, development of scar tissue, risk of aortic root dilation and subsequent erosions, and potential thrombi formation on the device.PFO closure with medical therapy is more cost-effective than medical therapy alone.Patients who underwent PFO closure had lower rates of depression, anxiety, and stress compared to those who did undergo closure.Development of the RoPE score has helped clinicians identify patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO who might be a candidate for PFO closure. A score of 7, 8, and 9-10 corresponds to a causal risk of 72%, 84%, and 88%, respectively, and defines a subset of patients who may benefit from PFO closure.Current guidelines recommend determining the need for PFO closure on a case-by-case basis, depending on risk factors, in patients age 60 or less with recent cryptogenic stroke in the setting of PFO.

Updates in the Management of Cryptogenic Stroke and Patent Foramen Ovale

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a common neurological disorder and may present with visual symptoms. A thorough workup is warranted to determine the underlying cause of stroke to optimize secondary prevention. Despite a full workup, a high-risk mechanism may not be identified. Optimal treatment in this patient population has been the subject of recent research, particularly with regard to low-risk stroke mechanisms such as patent foramen ovale (PFO).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Using PubMed and published stroke guidelines, an evidence-based literature review was performed.

RESULTS

In this review, we compare cryptogenic stroke with the newer concept of embolic stroke of undetermined source, summarize the most common causes presumed to underlie these strokes, and review the evidence for optimal antithrombotic management. We also review recent clinical trials demonstrating a benefit for percutaneous closure of PFO for secondary stroke prevention in select patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke management is based on evaluation of individual patient-risk factors. Evaluation and treatment is ideally directed by a vascular neurologist to ensure optimal secondary prevention, especially in cases where an underlying etiology is not identified on initial workup.