PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 14, 2012New England Journal of Medicine1,065 citations

Closure or Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke with Patent Foramen Ovale

View Full Paper
AFAnthony J. FurlanMRMark ReismanJMJoseph M. Massaro

Structured PICO

Does closure with a percutaneous device reduce the composite of stroke, TIA, or death in patients aged 18-60 with cryptogenic stroke or TIA and a patent foramen ovale compared to medical therapy alone?

P
Population
909 patients between 18 and 60 years of age who presented with a cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and had a patent foramen ovale.
I
Intervention
Closure with a percutaneous device
C
Comparator
Medical therapy alone
O
Outcome
Composite of stroke or transient ischemic attack during 2 years of follow-up, death from any cause during the first 30 days, or death from neurologic causes between 31 days and 2 yearscomposite

Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale did not offer a greater benefit than medical therapy alone for preventing recurrent stroke or TIA in patients with cryptogenic stroke.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of patent foramen ovale among patients with cryptogenic stroke is higher than that in the general population. Closure with a percutaneous device is often recommended in such patients, but it is not known whether this intervention reduces the risk of recurrent stroke. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of closure with a percutaneous device, as compared with medical therapy alone, in patients between 18 and 60 years of age who presented with a cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and had a patent foramen ovale. The primary end point was a composite of stroke or transient ischemic attack during 2 years of follow-up, death from any cause during the first 30 days, or death from neurologic causes between 31 days and 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 909 patients were enrolled in the trial. The cumulative incidence (Kaplan-Meier estimate) of the primary end point was 5.5% in the closure group (447 patients) as compared with 6.8% in the medical-therapy group (462 patients) (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 1.35; P=0.37). The respective rates were 2.9% and 3.1% for stroke (P=0.79) and 3.1% and 4.1% for TIA (P=0.44). No deaths occurred by 30 days in either group, and there were no deaths from neurologic causes during the 2-year follow-up period. A cause other than paradoxical embolism was usually apparent in patients with recurrent neurologic events. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cryptogenic stroke or TIA who had a patent foramen ovale, closure with a device did not offer a greater benefit than medical therapy alone for the prevention of recurrent stroke or TIA. (Funded by NMT Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00201461.).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Furlan et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a017ff10ed7d2e5335c9579https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1009639
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper