Recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients after percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale

Karagianni A, Mandalenakis Z, Dellborg M, Mirzada N, Johansson MC, Eriksson P.J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2020 May 16:104860. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.104860. Online ahead of print.PMID: 32430239 Free article.

 

Abstract

Background: Recent published trials have shown the efficacy of transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) for preventing recurrent cryptogenic cerebrovascular events. However, the risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events (rCVEs) is up to 5.7%, and the etiology is unclear.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for rCVEs after closure of PFO during long-term follow-up.

Methods: In our center, 282 consecutive patients underwent PFO closure because of a cryptogenic cerebrovascular event between 2006 and 2014. Their Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score was calculated retrospectively. We followed up with the patients by telephone, using hospital records to identify those who suffered from rCVEs. Patients with rCVEs were matched with two control patients of the same sex and RoPE score without rCVEs who underwent PFO closure at approximately the same time. The patients with rCVEs and controls participated in a clinical examination, including contrast transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and Holter electrocardiography, to investigate the possible cause of rCVEs compared with controls.

Results: Fourteen (5%) out of the 282 consecutive patients who underwent PFO closure suffered from rCVEs during a mean follow-up of 8.4 years (1.7 rCVEs per 100 patient-years). The median RoPE score of the patients was 7. Recurrent CVE occurred in 3.2 patients per 100 patient-years in patients with residual shunting compared with 0.8 patients per 100 patient-years in those without residual shunt. These patients were on antiplatelet treatment or without any effective anticoagulant treatment at the time rCVE occurred. The risk ratio of rCVEs in patients with residual shunting was 2.9-times higher than in patients without residual shunting (95% CI: 1.4-6.1) at follow-up visit. Four patients who had the BioSTAR device implanted suffered from an rCVE despite lack of residual shunting.

Conclusions: This study indicates that residual shunting and choice of the device may be the major reasons for rCVEs.

 

source:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32430239/

0 Comments