International Journal of Cardiovascular Sciences. 31/Jul/2020;33(4):318-20.
To Close or not to Close PFOs in Cryptogenic Stroke, an Evolving Question
Alex Felix
, Monica Luiza de Alcantara
This Editorial is referred by the Research article "The Role of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in the Secondary Prevention of Cryptogenic Stroke: a Meta-Analysis Report".
A matter of intense debate in the last decades, the ideal strategy for secondary prevention in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is not yet clearly defined. PFOs are prevalent in the general population and can be found in up to 40% of patients with cryptogenic stroke. Although in some cases of cryptogenic stroke PFO might be just an innocent bystander, paradoxical embolism is a well-known potential causative mechanism, especially in patients with concomitant deep venous thrombosis, whereby PFO closure may represent an effective measure to avoid recurrences. Even among patients with PFO, phenotypical heterogeneity may also determine percutaneous treatment suitability and directly impact on results, whereas the presence of large shunts, atrial septal aneurysm or associated complex septal defects must also be taken into account.
In the past years, several evidence-based guidelines and expert consensus on the management of patients with PFO and prevention of recurrent stroke have been published by international scientific societies, including a position paper sponsored by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), with the participation of eight European scientific societies. A recent guideline by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) was published online last April.
[…]
900
