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

Leonidas Palaiodimos, Damianos G. Kokkinidis, Robert T. Faillace, T. Raymond Foley, George D. Dangas, Matthew J. Price, Ioannis Mastoris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Patients with history of cryptogenic stroke are more likely to have a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and should be managed with antithrombotic agents, while the alternative option is percutaneous closure of PFOs. Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous closure vs. medical treatment for patients with PFO and prior cryptogenic stroke. Methods: Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were reviewed. A random-effect model meta-analysis was used and I-square was utilized to assess the heterogeneity. New ischemic stroke was defined as the primary endpoint. A sensitivity analysis was performed for Amplatzer device. Subgroup analyses were performed for different patient and PFO characteristics for the composite endpoints as defined by the included RCTs. Results: In total of 3440 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Closure devices were superior to medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic strokes (HR = 0.29; CI: 0.02–0.56), but were associated with increased risk of new onset of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (RR = 4.67; CI: 2.22–9.81). However, in the sensitivity analysis for Amplatzer device, there was no difference between the two groups in new onset of atrial arrhythmias. Closure devices were superior across all different subgroups when compared to medical treatment with the exception of patients with a small shunt. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that closure devices for patients with PFO and history of cryptogenic stroke can significantly decrease the risk of a new ischemic stroke. The use of Amplatzer device was not associated with increased risk of newly diagnosed atrial arrhythmias.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Patent Foramen Ovale
Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Stroke
Equipment and Supplies
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Therapeutics
Atrial Flutter
Fibrinolytic Agents
Atrial Fibrillation
Databases

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

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. / Palaiodimos, Leonidas; Kokkinidis, Damianos G.; Faillace, Robert T.; Foley, T. Raymond; Dangas, George D.; Price, Matthew J.; Mastoris, Ioannis.

In: Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1b0cf2905960400082e563ddb1c39f26,
title = "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",
abstract = "Background: Patients with history of cryptogenic stroke are more likely to have a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and should be managed with antithrombotic agents, while the alternative option is percutaneous closure of PFOs. Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous closure vs. medical treatment for patients with PFO and prior cryptogenic stroke. Methods: Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were reviewed. A random-effect model meta-analysis was used and I-square was utilized to assess the heterogeneity. New ischemic stroke was defined as the primary endpoint. A sensitivity analysis was performed for Amplatzer device. Subgroup analyses were performed for different patient and PFO characteristics for the composite endpoints as defined by the included RCTs. Results: In total of 3440 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Closure devices were superior to medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic strokes (HR = 0.29; CI: 0.02–0.56), but were associated with increased risk of new onset of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (RR = 4.67; CI: 2.22–9.81). However, in the sensitivity analysis for Amplatzer device, there was no difference between the two groups in new onset of atrial arrhythmias. Closure devices were superior across all different subgroups when compared to medical treatment with the exception of patients with a small shunt. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that closure devices for patients with PFO and history of cryptogenic stroke can significantly decrease the risk of a new ischemic stroke. The use of Amplatzer device was not associated with increased risk of newly diagnosed atrial arrhythmias.",
author = "Leonidas Palaiodimos and Kokkinidis, {Damianos G.} and Faillace, {Robert T.} and Foley, {T. Raymond} and Dangas, {George D.} and Price, {Matthew J.} and Ioannis Mastoris",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.carrev.2018.02.014",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine",
issn = "1553-8389",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale vs. medical treatment for patients with history of cryptogenic stroke

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AU - Palaiodimos, Leonidas

AU - Kokkinidis, Damianos G.

AU - Faillace, Robert T.

AU - Foley, T. Raymond

AU - Dangas, George D.

AU - Price, Matthew J.

AU - Mastoris, Ioannis

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: Patients with history of cryptogenic stroke are more likely to have a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and should be managed with antithrombotic agents, while the alternative option is percutaneous closure of PFOs. Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous closure vs. medical treatment for patients with PFO and prior cryptogenic stroke. Methods: Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were reviewed. A random-effect model meta-analysis was used and I-square was utilized to assess the heterogeneity. New ischemic stroke was defined as the primary endpoint. A sensitivity analysis was performed for Amplatzer device. Subgroup analyses were performed for different patient and PFO characteristics for the composite endpoints as defined by the included RCTs. Results: In total of 3440 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Closure devices were superior to medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic strokes (HR = 0.29; CI: 0.02–0.56), but were associated with increased risk of new onset of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (RR = 4.67; CI: 2.22–9.81). However, in the sensitivity analysis for Amplatzer device, there was no difference between the two groups in new onset of atrial arrhythmias. Closure devices were superior across all different subgroups when compared to medical treatment with the exception of patients with a small shunt. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that closure devices for patients with PFO and history of cryptogenic stroke can significantly decrease the risk of a new ischemic stroke. The use of Amplatzer device was not associated with increased risk of newly diagnosed atrial arrhythmias.

AB - Background: Patients with history of cryptogenic stroke are more likely to have a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and should be managed with antithrombotic agents, while the alternative option is percutaneous closure of PFOs. Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous closure vs. medical treatment for patients with PFO and prior cryptogenic stroke. Methods: Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were reviewed. A random-effect model meta-analysis was used and I-square was utilized to assess the heterogeneity. New ischemic stroke was defined as the primary endpoint. A sensitivity analysis was performed for Amplatzer device. Subgroup analyses were performed for different patient and PFO characteristics for the composite endpoints as defined by the included RCTs. Results: In total of 3440 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Closure devices were superior to medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic strokes (HR = 0.29; CI: 0.02–0.56), but were associated with increased risk of new onset of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (RR = 4.67; CI: 2.22–9.81). However, in the sensitivity analysis for Amplatzer device, there was no difference between the two groups in new onset of atrial arrhythmias. Closure devices were superior across all different subgroups when compared to medical treatment with the exception of patients with a small shunt. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that closure devices for patients with PFO and history of cryptogenic stroke can significantly decrease the risk of a new ischemic stroke. The use of Amplatzer device was not associated with increased risk of newly diagnosed atrial arrhythmias.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044269960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044269960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.02.014

DO - 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.02.014

M3 - Article

C2 - 29576519

AN - SCOPUS:85044269960

JO - Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine

JF - Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine

SN - 1553-8389

ER -