Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke
- PMID: 28902593
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1705915
Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke
Abstract
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 .).
Comment in
-
Adding patent foramen ovale closure to antiplatelet therapy reduced stroke after cryptogenic stroke.Ann Intern Med. 2018 Jan 16;168(2):JC7. doi: 10.7326/ACPJC-2018-168-2-007. Ann Intern Med. 2018. PMID: 29335719 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke.N Engl J Med. 2017 Sep 14;377(11):1033-1042. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1707404. N Engl J Med. 2017. PMID: 28902580 Clinical Trial.
-
Long-Term Outcomes of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Medical Therapy after Stroke.N Engl J Med. 2017 Sep 14;377(11):1022-1032. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610057. N Engl J Med. 2017. PMID: 28902590 Clinical Trial.
-
The Case for Selective Patent Foramen Ovale Closure After Cryptogenic Stroke.Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Mar;11(3):e004152. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.004152. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018. PMID: 29870380 Review.
-
close: Closure of patent foramen ovale, oral anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy to prevent stroke recurrence: Study design.Int J Stroke. 2016 Aug;11(6):724-32. doi: 10.1177/1747493016643551. Epub 2016 Apr 7. Int J Stroke. 2016. PMID: 27056964 Clinical Trial.
-
Closure, Anticoagulation, or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke With Patent Foramen Ovale: Systematic Review of Randomized Trials, Sequential Meta-Analysis, and New Insights From the CLOSE Study.J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Jun 17;7(12):e008356. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.008356. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018. PMID: 29910193 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Cardiac tamponade following aortic root erosion by an Amplatzer PFO-Occluder in a 41-year-old woman: Only a matter of sizing?J Cardiol Cases. 2020 Nov 20;23(3):123-126. doi: 10.1016/j.jccase.2020.10.014. eCollection 2021 Mar. J Cardiol Cases. 2020. PMID: 33717377 Free PMC article.
-
A Contemporary Review of Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Etiology, and Outcomes of Premature Stroke.Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2022 Dec;24(12):939-948. doi: 10.1007/s11883-022-01067-x. Epub 2022 Nov 14. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2022. PMID: 36374365 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Microtransesophageal Echocardiographic Guidance during Percutaneous Interatrial Septal Closure without General Anaesthesia.J Interv Cardiol. 2020 Sep 7;2020:1462140. doi: 10.1155/2020/1462140. eCollection 2020. J Interv Cardiol. 2020. PMID: 32982607 Free PMC article.
-
Bigger Is Feasible With a Short Retroaortic Rim But Is it Always Better?JACC Adv. 2023 Mar 31;2(2):100279. doi: 10.1016/j.jacadv.2023.100279. eCollection 2023 Mar. JACC Adv. 2023. PMID: 38938296 Free PMC article.
-
Antithrombotic Therapy Duration after Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Stroke Prevention: Impact on Long-Term Outcome.J Interv Cardiol. 2022 Oct 27;2022:6559447. doi: 10.1155/2022/6559447. eCollection 2022. J Interv Cardiol. 2022. PMID: 36348991 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical