Why the study?
Patent foramen ovale is considered a potential mechanism of embolic stroke of undetermined origin, but the features of right-to-left shunt compared with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke needed identification.
Do right-to-left shunt characteristics differ between patients with undetermined embolic ischemic stroke and non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke?
Do right-to-left shunt characteristics differ between patients with undetermined embolic ischemic stroke and non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke?
Patients with cryptogenic embolic stroke and PFO are more likely to have large right-to-left shunts and shunting at rest compared to those with non-cardioembolic stroke, suggesting shunt size is mechanistically relevant.
May refine ESUS phenotyping via shunt characteristics; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) has been considered a potential mechanism of embolic stroke of undetermined origin. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to identify the features of the right-to-left shunt (RLS) in patients with undetermined embolic ischemic stroke and compare them with those of patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted with 168 patients with stroke and RLS separated into the following two groups: the undetermined embolic stroke group (UES group) and non-cardioembolic stroke group (NCES group). All patients were assessed by transcranial Doppler to evaluate the presence and quantification of microembolic signals (MES) at rest and under Valsalva maneuver. RESULTS: Of all patients evaluated in the current study, 96 were included in the UES group and 72 in the NCES group. In the UES group, 65 patients had RLS with ≥10 MES (67.7%), which was higher than that observed in the NCES group (51.4%, p=0.038). According to the moment of the cardiac cycle, 75 patients (78.1%) in the UES group had a positive test at rest compared to 42 (58.3%) in the NCES group (p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrated that almost 70% of patients with undetermined embolic stroke and PFO presented a large RLS and more than 75% had RLS at rest. These findings suggest that the size of the shunt should be taken into account when evaluating whether PFO could be a possible mechanism underlying cryptogenic stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Scavasine et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: