Assessment of patent foramen ovale closure in elderly patients with cryptogenic transient ischemic attack or stroke: Efficacy, safety, and potential age-related benefit
- PMID: 40459369
- PMCID: PMC12133781
- DOI: 10.1177/23969873251341764
Assessment of patent foramen ovale closure in elderly patients with cryptogenic transient ischemic attack or stroke: Efficacy, safety, and potential age-related benefit
Abstract
Introduction: The efficacy and safety of patent foramen ovale closure (PFOC) in cryptogenic stroke (CS) patients aged ⩾ 60 remain controversial. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of PFOC in elderly (aged ⩾ 60) versus non-elderly (aged < 60) patients and examines potential age-related benefit.
Patients and methods: A hospital-based cohort study (January 2013-June 2023) compared the efficacy and safety between PFOC and non-PFOC groups in patient with CS or cryptogenic TIA. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent ischemic stroke, and safety outcomes included procedure-related adverse events and periprocedural atrial fibrillation (AF). Subgroup analyses, including various age ranges, were performed for the elderly group.
Results: Among 239 patients (mean age 57.2 years), 120 were elderly. During a mean follow-up of 3.1 years, the PFOC group had significantly fewer recurrent ischemic stroke than the non-PFOC group (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 0.10, 95% CI: 0.03-0.29, p = 0.001). The risk reduction was similar in elderly (AHR: 0.11, p = 0.004) and non-elderly (AHR: 0.10, p = 0.005) patients (p for interaction = 0.337). Safety outcomes were comparable across age groups, including younger elderly (60-70) and older elderly (⩾70). No life-threatening complications occurred; one patient required additional intervention. Subgroup analysis indicated significant risk reduction for patients aged ⩾ 65 (AHR: 0.01, p = 0.012) but not for those aged 60-65 (AHR: 0.24, p = 0.071).
Discussion and conclusion: PFO closure is safe and effective in elderly patients with CS. Advanced age should not be a contraindication for PFOC, as older patients may potentially derive more significant benefits from the procedure.
Keywords: Elderly; patent foramen ovale; patent foramen ovale closure.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Figures
References
-
- 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: 991–999. - PubMed
-
- 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: 1092–1100. - PubMed
-
- 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. - PubMed
-
- Søndergaard L, Kasner SE, Rhodes JF, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure or antiplatelet therapy for cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1033–1042. - PubMed
-
- Mas JL, Derumeaux G, Guillon B, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure or anticoagulation versus antiplatelets after stroke. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1011–1021. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
