Key result
Patent foramen ovale closure in embolic stroke of undetermined source reduces recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy in select patients, though it increases atrial fibrillation risk.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Meta-analysis reveals patent foramen ovale closure reduces recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy, highlighting utility in select patients despite higher atrial fibrillation risk.
Closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) reduces recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy in select patients but increases risk of atrial fibrillation. Device closure is an attractive option for young patients with an anatomically higher risk PFO and imaging proven ESUS. Benefit of PFO closure in ESUS compared with oral anticoagulation remains undefined.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chatterjee et al. (2018) conducted an editorial in Embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) with patent foramen ovale (PFO). Patent foramen ovale (PFO) device closure vs. Antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation was evaluated on Recurrent stroke. Patent foramen ovale closure in embolic stroke of undetermined source reduces recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy in select patients, though it increases atrial fibrillation risk.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: