Why the study?
The efficacy and safety of patent foramen ovale closure in cryptogenic stroke patients aged ⩾ 60 remain controversial.
Does patent foramen ovale closure reduce recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke or TIA?
Does patent foramen ovale closure reduce recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke or TIA?
Patent foramen ovale closure is safe and highly effective in reducing recurrent ischemic stroke in elderly patients with cryptogenic stroke, suggesting advanced age should not be a contraindication.
PFOC may be safe in selected elderly CS patients; leaves open need for RCTs before practice change.
Introduction: The efficacy and safety of patent foramen ovale closure (PFOC) in cryptogenic stroke (CS) patients aged ⩾ 60 remain controversial. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of PFOC in elderly (aged ⩾ 60) versus non-elderly (aged < 60) patients and examines potential age-related benefit. Patients and methods: A hospital-based cohort study (January 2013–June 2023) compared the efficacy and safety between PFOC and non-PFOC groups in patient with CS or cryptogenic TIA. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent ischemic stroke, and safety outcomes included procedure-related adverse events and periprocedural atrial fibrillation (AF). Subgroup analyses, including various age ranges, were performed for the elderly group. Results: Among 239 patients (mean age 57.2 years), 120 were elderly. During a mean follow-up of 3.1 years, the PFOC group had significantly fewer recurrent ischemic stroke than the non-PFOC group (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 0.10, 95% CI: 0.03–0.29, p = 0.001). The risk reduction was similar in elderly (AHR: 0.11, p = 0.004) and non-elderly (AHR: 0.10, p = 0.005) patients (p for interaction = 0.337). Safety outcomes were comparable across age groups, including younger elderly (60–70) and older elderly (⩾70). No life-threatening complications occurred; one patient required additional intervention. Subgroup analysis indicated significant risk reduction for patients aged ⩾ 65 (AHR: 0.01, p = 0.012) but not for those aged 60–65 (AHR: 0.24, p = 0.071). Discussion and conclusion: PFO closure is safe and effective in elderly patients with CS. Advanced age should not be a contraindication for PFOC, as older patients may potentially derive more significant benefits from the procedure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: