ArticleCurrent atherosclerosis reports2010
Patent foramen ovale and stroke: Should PFOs be closed in otherwise cryptogenic stroke?
Article in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Closure versus medical therapy for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale and a history of cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Cardiovascular diseases in patients 65 years and younger with non-cardiogenic stroke.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Since initial reports of its association with ischemic stroke appeared in 1988, there has been continued controversy regarding the existence and strength of the association between patent foramen ovale (PFO) and ischemic stroke. Many case-control studies have reported an association between incident cryptogenic ischemic stroke and PFO, yet population-based studies have failed to confirm this association. Studies of the risk of recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke with or without PFO have not shown an increased risk of recurrent stroke in patients with PFO. Meanwhile, use of devices to close PFOs and atrial septal defects percutaneously has increased dramatically since their introduction. Completion of the randomized clinical trials of PFO closure currently in progress is vital to determine if the benefits of PFO closure in cryptogenic stroke outweigh its risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.