AccScience Publishing / BH / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/BH026240031
Cite this article
5
Download
229
Views
Related Info Links
More by Authors Links
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
REVIEW ARTICLE

Patent foramen ovale-associated stroke: Historical evolution, clinical presentations, randomized trials, and closure strategies

Abdallah G. Aloteiby1 Baker M. Ayyash1 Ziyad M. Hijazi1*
Show Less
1 Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar
Brain & Heart, 026240031 https://doi.org/10.36922/BH026240031
Received: 10 June 2026 | Revised: 19 July 2026 | Accepted: 24 July 2026 | Published online: 3 August 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is increasingly recognized as an important contributor to cryptogenic ischemic stroke, particularly in younger patients without traditional vascular risk factors. Although present in about one-quarter of the general population, its higher prevalence among patients with otherwise unexplained stroke has raised questions regarding a causal relationship. The most widely accepted mechanism is paradoxical embolism, in which thrombotic material from the venous circulation bypasses the pulmonary filter through a transient right-to-left interatrial shunt. Over time, specific anatomical and clinical factors such as shunt size, the presence of an atrial septal aneurysm, and the overall vascular risk profile have been shown to help differentiate incidental PFO from clinically significant cases. Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated a reduction in recurrent ischemic stroke with percutaneous PFO closure in carefully selected patients, with benefit driven by appropriate patient selection and high-risk anatomical features. Despite these clinical trials and evidence, several uncertainties remain, including the management of older patients, the role of anticoagulation, and the significance of post-procedural atrial fibrillation, which is more common after closure but is typically transient. There is now increasing emphasis on individualized risk stratification using tools such as the Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score and PFO-Associated Stroke Causal Likelihood (PASCAL) classification. This review summarizes the current understanding of PFO-associated stroke, including pathophysiology, clinical presentation, randomized evidence, treatment strategies, and future directions, including emerging evidence on head-to-head device comparison and bioresorbable closure technology.

Keywords
Patent foramen ovale
Cryptogenic stroke
Paradoxical embolism
Percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure
Transcatheter closure
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
Ziyad M. Hijazi is a consultant for Occlutech GmbH (Germany), the manufacturer of the Occlutech PFO device. Other authors declare they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Cujec B, Mainra R, Johnson DH. Prevention of recurrent cerebral ischemic events in patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic strokes or transient ischemic attacks. Can J Cardiol. 1999;15:57-64
  2. Ntaios G, Papavasileiou V, Sagris D, et al. Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale Versus Medical Therapy in Patients With Cryptogenic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Stroke. 2018;49(2):412-418. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.020030
  3. Carroll JD, Saver JL, Thaler DE, et al. Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale versus Medical Therapy after Cryptogenic Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1092-1100. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1301440
  4. Meissner I, Whisnant JP, Khandheria BK, et al. Prevalence of Potential Risk Factors for Stroke Assessed by Transesophageal Echocardiography and Carotid Ultrasonography: The SPARC Study. Mayo Clin Proc. 1999;74(9):862-869. doi: 10.4065/74.9.862
  5. Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J, et al. Closure or Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke with Patent Foramen Ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(11):991-999. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009639
  6. Mas J-L, Derumeaux G, Guillon B, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1011-1021. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1705915
  7. Saver JL, Carroll JD, Thaler DE, et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Medical Therapy after Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1022-1032. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610057
  8. De Rosa S, Sievert H, Sabatino J, Polimeni A, Sorrentino S, Indolfi C. Percutaneous Closure Versus Medical Treatment in Stroke Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(5):343-350. doi: 10.7326/M17-3033
  9. Lee PH, Song J-K, Kim JS, et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(20):2335-2342. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.046
  10. Alberts MJ. Adding patent foramen ovale closure to antiplatelet drugs reduced ischemic stroke after cryptogenic stroke. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(2):JC6. doi: 10.7326/ACPJC-2018-168-2-006
  11. Khattab AA, Windecker S, Jüni P, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) using the Amplatzer PFO Occluder with medical treatment in patients with cryptogenic embolism (PC-Trial): rationale and design. Trials. 2011;12(1):56. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-56
  12. Casaubon L, McLaughlin P, Webb G, Yeo E, Merker D, Jaigobin C. Recurrent Stroke/TIA in Cryptogenic Stroke Patients with Patent Foramen Ovale. Can J Neurol Sci. 2007;34(1):74-80. doi: 10.1017/s0317167100005825
  13. Homma S, Di Tullio MR, Sacco RL, Smith C, Mohr JP. Surgical Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke Patients. Stroke. 1997;28(12):2376-2381. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.28.12.2376
  14. Ahmad Y, Howard JP, Arnold A, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure vs. medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(18):1638-1649. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy121
  15. Shah R, Nayyar M, Jovin IS, et al. Device Closure Versus Medical Therapy Alone for Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients With Cryptogenic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(5):335-342. doi: 10.7326/M17-2679
  16. Tsivgoulis G, Katsanos AH, Mavridis D, et al. Percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure for secondary stroke prevention: Network meta-analysis. Neurology. 2018;91(1):e8-e18. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005739
  17. Patel K, Doshi R, Goyal H, Shah P, Meraj P. Transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure versus standard medical therapy for prevention of recurrent stroke: Updated Meta-analysis with an importance on shunt size. Eur J Intern Med. 2018;57:e31-e33. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2018.08.009
  18. Chong YFV, Chan B. Device closure of patent foramen ovale reduces the risk of stroke compared to medical therapy in patients with cryptogenic ischaemic stroke and PFO: a meta-analysis (S54.007). Neurology. 2018;90(15_supplement):S54.007. doi: 10.1212/WNL.90.15_supplement.S54.007
  19. Kent DM, Saver JL, Kasner SE, et al. Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects in an Analysis of Pooled Individual Patient Data From Randomized Trials of Device Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale After Stroke. JAMA. 2021;326(22):2277. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.20956
  20. Mas J-L, Saver JL, Kasner SE, et al. Association of Atrial Septal Aneurysm and Shunt Size With Stroke Recurrence and Benefit From Patent Foramen Ovale Closure. JAMA Neurol. 2022;79(11):1175. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.3248
  21. Chatterjee T, Petzsch M, Ince H, et al. Interventional Closure with Amplatzer PFO Occluder of Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients with Paradoxical Cerebral Embolism. J Intervent Cardiol. 2005;18(3):173-179. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2005.04050.x
  22. Søndergaard L, Kasner SE, Rhodes JF, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(11):1033-1042. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1707404
  23. Almuzainy S, Hamodat O, Yahya R, Koniali S, Qaisar R. An Updated Meta-Analysis of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Versus Medical Therapy for Preventing Recurrent Cryptogenic Stroke. Cureus. 2025. doi: 10.7759/cureus.97504
  24. Ando T, Holmes AA, Pahuja M, et al. Meta-Analysis Comparing Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Versus Medical Therapy to Prevent Recurrent Cryptogenic Stroke. Am J Cardiol. 2018;121(5):649-655. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.11.037
  25. Yan C, Li H. Preliminary Investigation of In situ Thrombus Within Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients With and Without Stroke. JAMA. 2021;325(20):2116-2118. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.4359
  26. Yan C, Li H, Wang C, et al. Frequency and Size of In Situ Thrombus Within Patent Foramen Ovale. Stroke. 2023;54(5):1205-1213. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.122.041524
  27. Palazzo P, Heldner MR, Nasr N, Alexandrov AV. Transcranial Doppler With Microbubbles: Screening Test to Detect and Grade Right-to-Left Shunt After an Ischemic Stroke: A Literature Review. Stroke. 2024;55(12):2932-2941. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.046907
  28. Guchlerner M, Kardos P, Liss-Koch E, et al. PFO and right-to-left shunting in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med JCSM Off Publ Am Acad Sleep Med. 2012;8(4):375-380. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.2026
  29. Aoun J, Hatab T, Volpi J, Lin CH. Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Defect. Card Electrophysiol Clin. 2026;18(2):229-244. doi: 10.1016/j.ccep.2026.01.009
  30. Tworek M, Trojanowicz K, Sachajko Z, et al. A Coupled Inflammatory-Fibrotic-Nitrosative Axis in Patients with Patent Foramen Ovale and Cryptogenic Stroke. J Clin Med. 2026;15(11):4256. doi: 10.3390/jcm15114256
  31. Oto A, Aytemir K, Özkutlu S, et al. Transthoracic Echocardiography Guidance during Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale. Echocardiography. 2011;28(10):1074-1080. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8175.2011.01524.x
  32. Abrahamyan L, Barker M, Dharma C, et al. Real world long-term outcomes among adults undergoing transcatheter patent foramen closure with amplatzer PFO occluder. Int J Cardiol. 2023;371:109-115. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.09.033
  33. Vaduganathan M, Qamar A, Gupta A, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Secondary Prevention of Cryptogenic Stroke: Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Am J Med. 2018;131(5):575-577. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.11.027
  34. Syed NM, Oczkowski W. Review: In cryptogenic stroke with PFO, adding PFO closure to medical therapy reduces recurrence. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(8):JC43. doi: 10.7326/ACPJC-2018-168-8-043
  35. Mir H, Siemieniuk RAC, Ge LC, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure, antiplatelet therapy or anticoagulation in patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis incorporating complementary external evidence. BMJ Open. 2018;8(7):e023761. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023761
  36. Kase C, Cervantes-Arslanian A, Pikula A. Faculty Opinions recommendation of Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. Fac Opin-Post-Publ Peer Rev Biomed Lit. 793453177. doi: 10.3410/f.14267257.793453177
  37. Wahl A, Tai T, Praz F, et al. Late Results After Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale for Secondary Prevention of Paradoxical Embolism Using the Amplatzer PFO Occluder Without Intraprocedural Echocardiography. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(2):116-123. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2008.09.013
  38. Fiorelli EM, Carandini T, Gagliardi D, et al. Secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intern Emerg Med. 2018;13(8):1287-1303. doi: 10.1007/s11739-018-1909-8
  39. Sørensen H, Grove EL, Hojbjerg JA, Andersen A, Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Simonsen CZ. Recurrent ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack after patent foramen ovale closure: A cohort study. Int J Stroke. 2025;20(2):196-204. doi: 10.1177/17474930241281120
  40. Lim XY, Gao NL, Lee WY, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure in ischemic stroke patients with and without thrombophilia: a systematic review and meta-analyses. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2024;57(6):947-958. doi: 10.1007/s11239-024-02990-3
  41. Pickett CA, Villines TC, Ferguson MA, Hulten EA. Percutaneous Closure versus Medical Therapy Alone for Cryptogenic Stroke Patients with a Patent Foramen Ovale: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Tex Heart Inst J. 2014;41(4):357-367. doi: 10.14503/THIJ-13-3879
  42. Hornung M, Bertog SC, Franke J, et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing three different devices for percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovale. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(43):3362-3369. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht283
  43. Ntaios G, Papavasileiou V, Makaritsis K, Michel P. PFO closure vs. medical therapy in cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2013;169(2):101-105. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.08.058
  44. Fu Q, Guo CX, Du LJ, et al. Jing daoguan fengdu shu zhiliao buming yuanyin zuzhong hebing luanyuan kong weibi huanzhe de linchuang liaoxiao ji yuhou [Efficacy and outcome of transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke]. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2018; 46(11):882-886. [In Chinese] doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2018.11.012
  45. Sitwala P, Khalid MF, Khattak F, et al. Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients with Cryptogenic Stroke — An Updated Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019;20(8):687-694. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.09.010
  46. Rengifo-Moreno P, Palacios IF, Junpaparp P, Witzke CF, Morris DL, Romero-Corral A. Patent foramen ovale transcatheter closure vs. medical therapy on recurrent vascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(43):3342-3352. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht285
  47. Khan AR, Bin Abdulhak AA, Sheikh MA, et al. Device Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale Versus Medical Therapy in Cryptogenic Stroke. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(12):1316-1323. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.08.001
  48. Palaiodimos L, Kokkinidis DG, Faillace RT, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale vs. medical treatment for patients with history of cryptogenic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018;19(7):852-858. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.02.014
  49. Wang TKM, Wang MTM, Ruygrok P. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Versus Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke: Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials. Heart Lung Circ. 2019;28(4):623-631. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2018.02.023
  50. Alvarez C, Siddiqui WJ, Aggarwal S, Hasni SF, Hankins S, Eisen H. Reduced Stroke After Transcatheter Patent Foramen Ovale Closure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Med Sci. 2018;356(2):103-113. doi: 10.1016/j.amjms.2018.04.004
  51. Abo-salem E, Chaitman B, Helmy T, Boakye EA, Alkhawam H, Lim M. Patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy in cases with cryptogenic stroke, meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Neurol. 2018;265(3):578-585. doi: 10.1007/s00415-018-8750-x
  52. Pasceri V, Pelliccia F, Bressi E, et al. Net clinical benefit of patent foramen ovale closure in patients with cryptogenic stroke: Meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized trials. Int J Cardiol. 2018;266:75-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.02.106
  53. Nagaraja V, Raval J, Eslick GD, Burgess D, Denniss AR. Is Transcatheter Closure Better than Medical Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke with Patent Foramen Ovale? A Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials. Heart Lung Circ. 2013;22(11):903-909. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2013.07.022
  54. Vukadinović D, Schirmer SH, Vukadinović AN, et al. Interventional closure vs. medical therapy of patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of stroke: updated meta-analysis. Clin Res Cardiol. 2019;108(2):157-166. doi: 10.1007/s00392-018-1334-z
  55. Li J, Liu J, Liu M, et al. Closure versus medical therapy for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale and a history of cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(9). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009938.pub2
  56. Hamodata O, Almuzainy S, Yahya R, Koniali S. Comparison of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure vs Medical Therapy for the Prevention of Recurrent Cryptogenic Stroke: A Systematic Review. J Saudi Heart Assoc. 2025;37(2). doi: 10.37616/2212-5043.1427
  57. Barker M, Muthuppalaniappan AM, Abrahamyan L, et al. Periprocedural Outcomes of Fluoroscopy-Guided Patent Foramen Ovale Closure With Selective Use of Intracardiac Echocardiography. Can J Cardiol. 2020;36(10):1608-1615. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2019.12.032
  58. Wahl A, Windecker S, Eberli FR, Seiler C, Meier B. Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Symptomatic Patients. J Intervent Cardiol. 2001;14(2):203-210. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2001.tb00736.x
  59. Thaler DE, Carroll J, Saver J, et al. Abstract WP422: Mechanisms of Recurrent Ischemic Stroke Under Medical versus Device Therapy: Long Term Follow-up in the RESPECT PFO Trial. Stroke. 2016;47(suppl_1). doi: 10.1161/str.47.suppl_1.wp422
  60. Trabattoni D, Gaspardone A, Sgueglia G, et al. AMPLATZER versus Figulla occluder for transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure. EuroIntervention. 2017;12(17):2092-2099. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-15-00499
  61. Lee PH, Kim J-S, Song J-K, et al. Device Closure or Antithrombotic Therapy After Cryptogenic Stroke in Elderly Patients With a High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale. J Stroke. 2024;26(2):242-251. doi: 10.5853/jos.2023.03265
  62. Spencer FA, Lopes LC, Kennedy SA, Guyatt G. Systematic review of percutaneous closure versus medical therapy in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale. BMJ Open. 2014;4(3):e004282. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004282
  63. Dearani JA, Ugurlu BS, Danielson GK, et al. Surgical Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Prevention of Paradoxical Embolism-Related Cerebrovascular Ischemic Events. Circulation. 1999;100(Supplement 2):II-171-II-175. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.100.suppl_2.II-171
  64. Fischer D, Haentjes J, Klein G, et al. Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) in Patients with Paradoxical Embolism: Procedural and Follow-Up Results after Implantation of the Amplatzer®-Occluder Device. J Intervent Cardiol. 2011;24(1):85-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2010.00593.x
  65. Meier B, Kalesan B, Mattle HP, et al. Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Embolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(12):1083-1091. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1211716
  66. Capodanno D, Milazzo G, Vitale L, et al. Updating the evidence on patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy in patients with cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis of 2,303 patients from three randomised trials and 2,231 patients from 11 observational studies. EuroIntervention. 2014;9(11):1342-1349. doi: 10.4244/EIJV9I11A225
  67. Kent DM, Dahabreh IJ, Ruthazer R, et al. Device Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale After Stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(8):907-917. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.023
  68. Zhao E, Liu W, Zhang Y, et al. Safety and efficacy of Cardi-O-fix occluder for percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovale: A single-center prospective study. Medicine. 2017;96(14):e6572. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006572
  69. Kasner SE, Thomassen L, Søndergaard L, Rhodes JF, Larsen CC, Jacobson J. Patent foramen ovale closure with GORE HELEX or CARDIOFORM Septal Occluder vs. antiplatelet therapy for reduction of recurrent stroke or new brain infarct in patients with prior cryptogenic stroke: Design of the randomized Gore REDUCE Clinical Study. Int J Stroke. 2017;12(9):998-1004. doi: 10.1177/1747493017701152
  70. Toggweiler S, Moccetti F, Conrad N, et al. Amplatzer or Figulla Flex II Occluder: a comparative study of outcomes after transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure. J Invasive Cardiol. 2024;36(4). doi: 10.25270/jic/23.00291
  71. Mas J-L, Derumeaux G, Amarenco P, et al. close : Closure of patent foramen ovale, oral anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy to prevent stroke recurrence: Study design. Int J Stroke. 2016;11(6):724-732. doi: 10.1177/1747493016643551
  72. Goldsweig AM, Thaler DE, Yakubov SJ. Clinical Investigation of the Safety and Effectiveness of the Occlutech Flex II PFO Occluder: Design and Rationale of the Multicenter, Randomized OCCLUFLEX Trial. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2026;5(1):104046. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2025.104046
  73. Correction: Device Closure Versus Medical Therapy Alone for Patent Foramen Ovale. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(6):428. doi: 10.7326/L18-0379
  74. Sievert H, Horvath K, Zadan E, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Patients with Transient Ischemia Attack/Stroke. J Intervent Cardiol. 2001;14(2):261-266. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2001.tb00745.x
  75. Braun MU, Fassbender D, Schoen SP, et al. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cerebral ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39(12):2019-2025. doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01904-6
  76. Riaz H, Khan MS, Schenone AL, Waheed AA, Khan AR, Krasuski RA. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale following cryptogenic stroke: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am Heart J. 2018;199:44-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.01.008
  77. Wahl A, Jüni P, Mono M-L, et al. Long-Term Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale With Medical Treatment After Paradoxical Embolism. Circulation. 2012;125(6):803-812. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.030494
  78. Mariucci E, Donti A, Salomone L, et al. Recurrent Stroke after Transcatheter PFO Closure in Cryptogenic Stroke or Tia: Long-Term Follow-Up. Cardiol Res Pract. 2017;2017:1-10. doi: 10.1155/2017/9849425
  79. Rudolph V, Augustin J, Hofmann T, et al. Predictors of recurrent stroke after percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale. EuroIntervention. 2014;9(12):1418-1422. doi: 10.4244/EIJV9I12A239
  80. Farjat-Pasos JI, Guedeney P, Houde C, et al. Transcatheter Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack. Am J Cardiol. 2023;187:148-153. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.10.044
  81. Windecker S, Wahl A, Nedeltchev K, et al. Comparison of medical treatment with percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):750-758. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.05.044
  82. Khan R, Hosseini F, Kohli N. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Remote Stroke: Better Late Than Never? Can J Cardiol. 2022;38(8):1132-1134. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2022.06.002
  83. Caso V, Turc G, Abdul-Rahim AH, et al. European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patent foramen ovale (PFO) after stroke. Eur Stroke J. 2024;9(4):800-834. doi: 10.1177/23969873241247978
  84. Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. 2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack: A Guideline From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2021;52(7):e364-e467. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000375
  85. Pristipino C, Sievert H, D’Ascenzo F, et al. European position paper on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale. General approach and left circulation thromboembolism. EuroIntervention J Eur Collab Work Group Interv Cardiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2019;14(13):1389-1402. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00622
  86. Pickett CA, Villines TC, Resar JR, Hulten EA. Cost effectiveness and clinical efficacy of patent foramen ovale closure as compared to medical therapy in cryptogenic stroke patients: A detailed cost analysis and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Cardiol. 2018;273:74-79. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.07.099
  87. Honěk J, Šrámek M, Honěk T, et al. Screening and Risk Stratification Strategy Reduced Decompression Sickness Occurrence in Divers With Patent Foramen Ovale. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;15(2):181-189. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.06.019
  88. Zhang F, Dong J, Wei P, et al. Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale With a Novel Biodegradable Device: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Circulation. 2026;153(2):71-81. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.125.074609
Share
Back to top
Brain & Heart, Electronic ISSN: 2972-4139 Published by AccScience Publishing