Key result
Revascularization and supportive care manage MI in a 59-year-old man with a PFO.
Why the study?
The decision to close a patent foramen ovale found after myocardial infarction, especially with right ventricular infarction, lacks solid guidelines.
Case Report (n=1)
This case report highlights the clinical dilemma and lack of guidelines regarding the closure of a patent foramen ovale discovered after an inferior wall myocardial infarction.
Lacks evidence-based guidance for post-MI PFO closure; leaves open whether closure improves outcomes pending prospective trials.
Patent foramen ovale (PFO) occurs in 25% of people. The decision on whether to close the PFO found after myocardial infarction and specifically right ventricular infarction is debated, with no solid guidelines addressing this subject. Here we present the case of a 59-year-old man who presented with a myocardial infarction and was found to have PFO. He was treated with revascularization of the culprit artery, followed by supportive care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Albaghdadi et al. (2018) conducted a case report in Myocardial infarction and patent foramen ovale (n=1). Revascularization of the culprit artery and supportive care was evaluated. A 59-year-old man with myocardial infarction and a patent foramen ovale was treated with revascularization of the culprit artery and supportive care.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: