BACKGROUND: Trials of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure to prevent recurrent stroke have been inconclusive. We investigated whether patients with cryptogenic stroke and echocardiographic features representing risk of stroke would benefit from PFO closure or anticoagulation, as compared with antiplatelet therapy.
METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, we assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients 16 to 60 years of age who had had a recent stroke attributed to PFO, with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, to transcatheter PFO closure plus long-term antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group), antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet-only group), or oral anticoagulation (anticoagulation group) (randomization group 1). Patients with contraindications to anticoagulants or to PFO closure were randomly assigned to the alternative noncontraindicated treatment or to antiplatelet therapy (randomization groups 2 and 3). The primary outcome was occurrence of stroke. The comparison of PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 2, and the comparison of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 3.
RESULTS: A total of 663 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a mean (±SD) of 5.3±2.0 years. In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 2, no stroke occurred among the 238 patients in the PFO closure group, whereas stroke occurred in 14 of the 235 patients in the antiplatelet-only group (hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0 to 0.26; P<0.001). Procedural complications from PFO closure occurred in 14 patients (5.9%). The rate of atrial fibrillation was higher in the PFO closure group than in the antiplatelet-only group (4.6% vs. 0.9%, P=0.02). The number of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (P=0.56). In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 3, stroke occurred in 3 of 187 patients assigned to oral anticoagulants and in 7 of 174 patients assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had had a recent cryptogenic stroke attributed to PFO with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, the rate of stroke recurrence was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone. PFO closure was associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; CLOSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00562289 .).
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>The efficacy of closure of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) in the prevention of recurrent stroke after cryptogenic stroke is uncertain. We investigated the effect of PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet therapy alone on the risks of recurrent stroke and new brain infarctions.<b>METHODS: </b>In this multinational trial involving patients with a PFO who had had a cryptogenic stroke, we randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to undergo PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group) or to receive antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet-only group). Imaging of the brain was performed at the baseline screening and at 24 months. The coprimary end points were freedom from clinical evidence of ischemic stroke (reported here as the percentage of patients who had a recurrence of stroke) through at least 24 months after randomization and the 24-month incidence of new brain infarction, which was a composite of clinical ischemic stroke or silent brain infarction detected on imaging.<b>RESULTS: </b>We enrolled 664 patients (mean age, 45.2 years), of whom 81% had moderate or large interatrial shunts. During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, clinical ischemic stroke occurred in 6 of 441 patients (1.4%) in the PFO closure group and in 12 of 223 patients (5.4%) in the antiplatelet-only group (hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.62; P=0.002). The incidence of new brain infarctions was significantly lower in the PFO closure group than in the antiplatelet-only group (22 patients [5.7%] vs. 20 patients [11.3%]; relative risk, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.91; P=0.04), but the incidence of silent brain infarction did not differ significantly between the study groups (P=0.97). Serious adverse events occurred in 23.1% of the patients in the PFO closure group and in 27.8% of the patients in the antiplatelet-only group (P=0.22). Serious device-related adverse events occurred in 6 patients (1.4%) in the PFO closure group, and atrial fibrillation occurred in 29 patients (6.6%) after PFO closure.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>Among patients with a PFO who had had a cryptogenic stroke, the risk of subsequent ischemic stroke was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone; however, PFO closure was associated with higher rates of device complications and atrial fibrillation. (Funded by W.L. Gore and Associates; Gore REDUCE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00738894 .).
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>Whether closure of a patent foramen ovale reduces the risk of recurrence of ischemic stroke in patients who have had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke is unknown.<b>METHODS: </b>In a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, with blinded adjudication of end-point events, we randomly assigned patients 18 to 60 years of age who had a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and had had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke to undergo closure of the PFO (PFO closure group) or to receive medical therapy alone (aspirin, warfarin, clopidogrel, or aspirin combined with extended-release dipyridamole; medical-therapy group). The primary efficacy end point was a composite of recurrent nonfatal ischemic stroke, fatal ischemic stroke, or early death after randomization. The results of the analysis of the primary outcome from the original trial period have been reported previously; the current analysis of data from the extended follow-up period was considered to be exploratory.<b>RESULTS: </b>We enrolled 980 patients (mean age, 45.9 years) at 69 sites. Patients were followed for a median of 5.9 years. Treatment exposure in the two groups was unequal (3141 patient-years in the PFO closure group vs. 2669 patient-years in the medical-therapy group), owing to a higher dropout rate in the medical-therapy group. In the intention-to-treat population, recurrent ischemic stroke occurred in 18 patients in the PFO closure group and in 28 patients in the medical-therapy group, resulting in rates of 0.58 events per 100 patient-years and 1.07 events per 100 patient-years, respectively (hazard ratio with PFO closure vs. medical therapy, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31 to 0.999; P=0.046 by the log-rank test). Recurrent ischemic stroke of undetermined cause occurred in 10 patients in the PFO closure group and in 23 patients in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.79; P=0.007). Venous thromboembolism (which comprised events of pulmonary embolism and deep-vein thrombosis) was more common in the PFO closure group than in the medical-therapy group.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>Among adults who had had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke, closure of a PFO was associated with a lower rate of recurrent ischemic strokes than medical therapy alone during extended follow-up. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; RESPECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00465270 .).
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of device closure and medical therapy in prevention of recurrent embolic event in the Korean population with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale (PFO).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive 164 patients (men: 126 patients, mean age: 48.1 years, closure group: 72 patients, medical group: 92 patients) were enrolled. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or peripheral embolism.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups, except age, which was higher in the medical group (45.3±9.8 vs. 50.2±6.1, p<0.0001), and risk of paradoxical embolism score, which was higher in the closure group (6.2±1.6 vs. 5.7±1.3, p=0.026). On echocardiography, large right-to-left shunt (81.9% vs. 63.0%, p=0.009) and shunt at rest/septal hypermobility (61.1% vs. 23.9%, p<0.0001) were more common in the closure group. The device was successfully implanted in 71 (98.6%) patients. The primary end point occurred in 2 patients (2 TIA, 2.8%) in the closure group and in 2 (1 death, 1 stroke, 2.2%) in the medical group. Event-free survival rate did not differ between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Compared to medical therapy, device closure of PFO in patients with cryptogenic stroke did not show difference in reduction of recurrent embolic events in the real world's setting. However, considering high risk of echocardiographic findings in the closure group, further investigation of the role of PFO closure in the Asian population is needed.
BACKGROUND: The options for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism in patients with patent foramen ovale are administration of antithrombotic medications or percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ovale. We investigated whether closure is superior to medical therapy.
METHODS: We performed a multicenter, superiority trial in 29 centers in Europe, Canada, Brazil, and Australia in which the assessors of end points were unaware of the study-group assignments. Patients with a patent foramen ovale and ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or a peripheral thromboembolic event were randomly assigned to undergo closure of the patent foramen ovale with the Amplatzer PFO Occluder or to receive medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal stroke, TIA, or peripheral embolism. Analysis was performed on data for the intention-to-treat population.
RESULTS: The mean duration of follow-up was 4.1 years in the closure group and 4.0 years in the medical-therapy group. The primary end point occurred in 7 of the 204 patients (3.4%) in the closure group and in 11 of the 210 patients (5.2%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for closure vs. medical therapy, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24 to 1.62; P=0.34). Nonfatal stroke occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the closure group and 5 patients (2.4%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.72; P=0.14), and TIA occurred in 5 patients (2.5%) and 7 patients (3.3%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.23 to 2.24; P=0.56).
CONCLUSIONS: Closure of a patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism did not result in a significant reduction in the risk of recurrent embolic events or death as compared with medical therapy. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00166257.).
BACKGROUND: Whether closure of a patent foramen ovale is effective in the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke in patients who have had a cryptogenic stroke is unknown. We conducted a trial to evaluate whether closure is superior to medical therapy alone in preventing recurrent ischemic stroke or early death in patients 18 to 60 years of age.
METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, randomized, event-driven trial, we randomly assigned patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to medical therapy alone or closure of the patent foramen ovale. The primary results of the trial were analyzed when the target of 25 primary end-point events had been observed and adjudicated.
RESULTS: We enrolled 980 patients (mean age, 45.9 years) at 69 sites. The medical-therapy group received one or more antiplatelet medications (74.8%) or warfarin (25.2%). Treatment exposure between the two groups was unequal (1375 patient-years in the closure group vs. 1184 patient-years in the medical-therapy group, P=0.009) owing to a higher dropout rate in the medical-therapy group. In the intention-to-treat cohort, 9 patients in the closure group and 16 in the medical-therapy group had a recurrence of stroke (hazard ratio with closure, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 1.11; P=0.08). The between-group difference in the rate of recurrent stroke was significant in the prespecified per-protocol cohort (6 events in the closure group vs. 14 events in the medical-therapy group; hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.96; P=0.03) and in the as-treated cohort (5 events vs. 16 events; hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.75; P=0.007). Serious adverse events occurred in 23.0% of the patients in the closure group and in 21.6% in the medical-therapy group (P=0.65). Procedure-related or device-related serious adverse events occurred in 21 of 499 patients in the closure group (4.2%), but the rate of atrial fibrillation or device thrombus was not increased.
CONCLUSIONS: In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant benefit associated with closure of a patent foramen ovale in adults who had had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke. However, closure was superior to medical therapy alone in the prespecified per-protocol and as-treated analyses, with a low rate of associated risks. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; RESPECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00465270.).
Paradoxical embolism due to a patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a possible cause of ischemic stroke, particularly in young cryptogenic stroke patients. In most cases, however, it is difficult to establish a firm etiological association and the debate about management is ongoing. The Austrian Paradoxical Cerebral Embolism Trial was designed as a prospective, national, multi-center, non-randomized registry to add further data on this topic before the completion of randomized controlled trials. Over 27 months 188 cryptogenic stroke/TIA patients ≤55 years were entered by 15 Austrian stroke units. Contrast transesophageal echocardiography demonstrated a cardiac right-to-left shunt (RLS) in 176 patients; a pulmonary RLS was assumed in 10, and 2 showed both. Ninety-seven (55 %) patients with cardiac RLS underwent interventional treatment, and this was more likely for patients with stroke as index event, a symptomatic infarction on MRI and a large size of PFO. Over 2 years, recurrences occurred at a rate of approximately 1.3 % for stroke and 4.3 % for TIA, and were especially frequent in patients with pulmonary RLS. When comparing outcomes in patients with cardiac RLS there was a trend for fewer recurrences with interventional management (closure: four TIA in four patients vs. medical: three strokes and seven TIA in nine patients; p = 0.066 for events, p = 0.085 for patients). The complication rate was 13.4, and 5.7 % had residual shunting. The possible causes for paradoxical embolism in young patients with cryptogenic stroke appear more variable than usually considered, and other causes than PFO should not be neglected. Interventional treatment of a cardiac RLS may offer a small benefit, but has to be weighed against possible complications and the problem of establishing causality.
<b>BACKGROUND: </b>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.<b>METHODS: </b>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.<b>RESULTS: </b>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.<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>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.).
BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack presumably related to patent foramen ovale (PFO) are at risk for recurrent cerebrovascular events. Differences in long-term clinical outcome were investigated among patients with percutaneous PFO closure and those who received medical treatment.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 1994 and 2000, 308 consecutive patients with cerebrovascular events presumably related to PFO underwent either percutaneous PFO closure (150 patients) or medical treatment (158 patients). Patients were followed up prospectively for up to 15 years. Seven patients were lost during follow-up. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or peripheral embolism. We analyzed 103 propensity score-matched pairs of patients who underwent percutaneous PFO closure or medical treatment. At a median follow-up of 9 years, the primary composite outcome occurred in 11 patients slated to PFO closure (11%) and 22 patients slated to medical treatment (21%; hazard ratio=0.43; 95% confidence interval=0.20-0.94; P=0.033). The treatment effect was driven by a decrease in the risk of transient ischemic attack of 5% versus 14%, respectively (hazard ratio=0.31; 95% confidence interval=0.10-0.94; P=0.039). The risk of all-cause (6% in both groups) and cardiovascular (3% in both groups) mortality appeared to be identical.
CONCLUSION: In this long-term observational, propensity score-matched study, percutaneous PFO closure was more effective than medical treatment for the secondary prevention of recurrent cerebrovascular events among patients with PFO-related transient ischemic attack or stroke.
BACKGROUND: Treatment of patent foramen ovale in young patients with stroke is not supported by robust scientific evidence. In clinical practice, a pragmatic approach is needed to guide such therapeutic decisions. This study aims at standardising the diagnostic pathway for stroke patients younger than 55 years of age with a patent foramen ovale; elaborating a therapeutic algorithm; discussing every case in regular interdisciplinary counselling meeting; and setting up a follow-up schedule to assess clinical outcomes.
METHODS: This is a cohort study on the effect of a standardised treatment of stroke patients with a patent foramen ovale. The primary endpoints include occurrence of recurrent ischaemic events, major bleeding, and device-related complications. The secondary endpoints include drug- or procedure-related side effects, persistence of right-to-left shunt, and persistent cardiac arrhythmia of new onset.
RESULTS: A total of 103 patients have been enrolled. In all, 51 patients underwent percutaneous atrial septal repair; of these, one had minor post-procedural bleeding. At 12 months, 25% of this group of patients showed a latent I grade shunt, one patient a latent II degree shunt, and none had a persistent shunt. The remaining 52 patients were addressed to medical therapy; one of them experienced stroke recurrences while on medical therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: This model of implementation of available evidence to clinical practice via a group-based, multi-disciplinary counselling provides a shared and coherent decision pathway and yielded a very low rate of recurrent events and therapy-related complications. This approach could be replicated in specific protocols for other complex or neglected clinical problems.
Trials of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure to prevent recurrent stroke have been inconclusive. We investigated whether patients with cryptogenic stroke and echocardiographic features representing risk of stroke would benefit from PFO closure or anticoagulation, as compared with antiplatelet therapy.
METHODS:
In a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, we assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients 16 to 60 years of age who had had a recent stroke attributed to PFO, with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, to transcatheter PFO closure plus long-term antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group), antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet-only group), or oral anticoagulation (anticoagulation group) (randomization group 1). Patients with contraindications to anticoagulants or to PFO closure were randomly assigned to the alternative noncontraindicated treatment or to antiplatelet therapy (randomization groups 2 and 3). The primary outcome was occurrence of stroke. The comparison of PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 2, and the comparison of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 3.
RESULTS:
A total of 663 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a mean (±SD) of 5.3±2.0 years. In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 2, no stroke occurred among the 238 patients in the PFO closure group, whereas stroke occurred in 14 of the 235 patients in the antiplatelet-only group (hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0 to 0.26; P<0.001). Procedural complications from PFO closure occurred in 14 patients (5.9%). The rate of atrial fibrillation was higher in the PFO closure group than in the antiplatelet-only group (4.6% vs. 0.9%, P=0.02). The number of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (P=0.56). In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 3, stroke occurred in 3 of 187 patients assigned to oral anticoagulants and in 7 of 174 patients assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone.
CONCLUSIONS:
Among patients who had had a recent cryptogenic stroke attributed to PFO with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, the rate of stroke recurrence was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone. PFO closure was associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; CLOSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00562289 .).
