Dual‐center experiences with interventional closure of patent foramen ovale: A medium‐term follow‐up study comparing two patient groups aged under and over 60 years. Issue 3 (17th February 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nachoski, Dejan; Schroeder, Joerg; Almalla, Mohammad; Kubini, Ralf; Tchaikovski, Vadim; Kosinski, Christoph; Becker, Michael; Aljalloud, Ali
• Is Part Of: Clinical cardiology. Volume 44:Issue 3(2021)
• Page Start: 386
• Page End: 391
• Publication Date: 2021-02-17
• Subjects: cryptogenic stroke -- elder patients -- patent foramen ovale -- PFO and atrial fibrillation -- PFO closure; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.12005
• DOI: 10.1002/clc.23548
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0160-9289

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Current guidelines recommend interventional closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke who are under 60 years of age. Hypothesis: The hypothesis of this study was to compare follow‐up results of PFO closure in patients over 60 years of age to those of patients under 60 years of age in order to determine whether the procedure is safe and effective for both age groups. Methods: We included 293 patients who had a cryptogenic ischemic stroke and a PFO confirmed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and who were scheduled for percutaneous closure of the PFO between 2014 and 2019. The device implantation was completed in all patients using an Amplatzer™, Occlutec™, or Cardia Ultrasept PFO occluder. Results: Follow‐up TEE examinations were performed at intervals of 1, 3, and 6 months after implantation. Patients were followed for a median of 3.6 ± 1.2 years. Recurrent ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, cardiac death, arrhythmias, and residual shunt were reported equally in both groups. Conclusions: Interventional closure of PFO can be as safe and effective in patients over 60 years of age as it is in patients under 60 years of age regardless of the device used. In this older patient group, rigorous discussion and a case‐by‐case decision‐making process including cardiologists and neurologists is warranted to ensure optimal procedure selection.