Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Versus Medical Therapy in Cryptogenic Strokes and Transient Ischemic Attacks: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Abstract

Cryptogenic strokes account for about 25% to 40% of total ischemic strokes, and 1 of the 3 of these have a patent foramen ovale (PFO). A meta-analysis concerning the effectiveness and safety of PFO closure in cryptogenic strokes or transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) was performed. We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through April 2018. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials. Primary and secondary end points were, respectively, stroke or TIA and stroke recurrences. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all end points using fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses. Data were included from 6 trials involving 3560 patients. In the pooled analysis, PFO closure was superior to medical treatment for both primary (RR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.82; P < .02) and secondary end points (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.44-0.76; P < .001). Transcatheter closure significantly increased the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF; RR: 5.74; P < .001). Percutaneous closure is superior to medical treatment in reducing stroke and TIA recurrence, even if with a significant risk increasing for new-onset AF. These findings suggest that transcatheter closure is indicated in patients with cryptogenic strokes and large PFO.

Keywords

patent foramen ovale treatment cryptogenic stroke

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Global Burden of Disease 2016 Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death, 1980-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390(10100):1151–210.

Global Burden of Disease 2016 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390(10100):1211–59.

Adams

Jr Bendixen

Kappelle

. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke: definitions for use in a multicentre clinical trial: TOAST Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke. 1993;24(1):35–41.

Grau

Weimar

Buggle

. Risk factors, outcome, and treatment subtypes of ischemic stroke: the German stroke data bank. Stroke. 2001;32(11):2559–66.

Khairy

O’Donnell

Landzberg

. Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and presumed paradoxical thromboemboli: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(9):753–60.

Consoli

Paciaroni

Galati

; behalf of SISIFO group. Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in ischaemic stroke in Italy: results of SISIFO Study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;39(3-4):162–9.

Davis

Gregson

Willeit

Stephan

Al-Shahi Salman

Brayne

. Patent foramen ovale, ischemic stroke and migraine: systematic review and stratified meta-analysis of association studies. Neuroepidemiology. 2013;40(1):56–67.

Kernan

Ovbiagele

Black

; American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2014;45(7):2160–236. doi:10.1161/STR.0000000000000024/-/DC1

Kitsios

Dahabreh

Abu Dabrh

Thaler

Kent

. Patent foramen ovale closure and medical treatments for secondary stroke prevention: a systematic review of observational and randomized evidence. Stroke. 2012;43(2):422–31.

10.

Windecker

Wahl

Nedeltchev

. Comparison of medical treatment with percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):750–8.

11.

Jiu

Liu

. Closure versus medical therapy for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale and a history of cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(9):CD009938. Art N. CD009938

12.

Rengifo-Moreno

Palacios

Junpaparp

Witzke

Morris

Romero-Corral

. Patent foramen ovale transcatheter closure vs. medical therapy on recurrent vascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(43):3342–52.

13.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

Altman

; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

14.

Furlan

Reisman

Massaro

; CLOSURE I Investigators. Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(11):991–9.

15.

Saver

Carroll

Thaler

; RESPECT Investigators. Long-term outcomes of patent foramen ovale closure or medical therapy after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1022–32.

16.

Meier

Kalesan

Mattle

; PC Trial Investigators. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic embolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1083–91.

17.

Mas

Derumeaux

Guillon

; CLOSE Investigators. Patent foramen ovale closure or anticoagulation vs. antiplatelets after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1011–21.

18.

Sondergaard

Kasner

Rhodes

; Gore REDUCE Clinical Study Investigators. Patent foramen ovale closure or antiplatelet therapy for cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1033–42.

19.

Lee

Song

Kim

. Cryptogenic stroke and high-risk patent foramen ovale: the DEFENSE-PFO trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(20):2335–42. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.046

20.

Mojadidi

Elgendy

. Transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure after cryptogenic stroke. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10(21):2228–30.

21.

Ando

Holmes

Pahuja

. Meta-analysis comparing patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy to prevent recurrent cryptogenic stroke. Am J Cardiol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.11.037.

22.

De Rosa

Sievert

Sabatino

Polimeni

Sorrentino

Indolfi

. Percutaneous closure versus medical treatment in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(5):343–50.

23.

Shah

Nayyar

Javin

. Device closure versus medical therapy alone for patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(5):335–42.

24.

Ntaios

Papavasileiou

Sagris

. Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy in patients with cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2018;49(5):412–8.

25.

Riaz

Khan

Schenone

Waheed

Khan

Krasuski

. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale following cryptogenic stroke: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am Heart J. 2018;199:44–50.

26.

Abo-Salem

Chaitmen

Helmy

Boakye

Alkhawam

Lim

. Patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy in cases with cryptogenic strokes, meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Neurol. 2018;265(8):578–85.

27.

Darmoch

Al-Khadra

Soud

Fanari

Alraies

. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;45(3-4):162–9.

28.

Hekeem

Cilingiroglu

Katramados

. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of ischemic stroke: quantitative synthesis of pooled randomized trial data. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018. doi:10.1002/ccd.27487

29.

Staubach

Steinberg

Zimmermann

. New onset atrial fibrillation after patent foramen ovale closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74(6):889–95.

30.

Kent

Dahabreh

Ruthazer

. Device closure of patent foramen ovale after stroke: pooled analysis of completed randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(8):907–17.

31.

Sá

MPBO

Oliveira Neto

LAP

Nascimento

GCS

. Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke: a meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials with 3440 patients. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;33(1):89–98.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.40 MB