Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29910193›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2018

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.

Guillaume Turc, David Calvet, Patrice Guérin, Marjorie Sroussi, Gilles Chatellier, Jean-Louis Mas, CLOSE Investigators

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 72 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06983795 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Pioneering Advancements in Cardiocerebrovascular Interactions in the Asia pacFIC - Patent Foramen Ovale Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorNational University Hospital, SingaporeRan2025 to 2030Enrolled1,000ConditionsIschemic Stroke, Patent Foramen OvaleArmsPFO closure using approved PFO closure devices, Surgical PFO closure, Medical management
NCT07380490 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing the Safety and EfficAcy of the Cocoon PFO Occluder Versus Amplatzer PFO ClosurE Device for Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients With a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack A Non-Profit, Single-blind, Investigator Driven Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorGiuseppe TarantiniRan2026 to 2028Enrolled1,260ConditionsPatent Foramen Ovale, Stroke, Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA)ArmsPFO Closure procedure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 183 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Treatment of patent foramen ovale.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO): History, Diagnosis, and Management.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Guillaume TurcDepartment of Neurology, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, Paris, France.
David CalvetDepartment of Neurology, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, Paris, France.
Patrice GuérinDepartment of Cardiology, INSERM UMR 915 Institut du Thorax, Nantes, France.
Marjorie SroussiUniversité Paris Descartes Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Gilles ChatellierUniversité Paris Descartes Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Jean-Louis MasDepartment of Neurology, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, Paris, France jl.mas@ch-sainte-anne.fr.
CLOSE Investigators
Sorbonne Paris Cité · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRCentre Hospitalier Sainte-Anne · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRDélégation Paris 5 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure, anticoagulation, and antiplatelet therapy to prevent stroke recurrence in patients with PFO-associated cryptogenic stroke. METHODS AND

resultsWe searched Medline, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE through March 2018. The primary outcome was stroke recurrence. Pooled incidences, hazard ratios, and risk ratios (RRs) were calculated in random-effects meta-analyses. PFO closure was associated with a lower risk of recurrent stroke compared with antithrombotic therapy (antiplatelet therapy or anticoagulation: 3560 patients from 6 RCTs; RR=0.36, 95% CI: 0.17-0.79; I

conclusionsPFO closure is superior to antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke recurrence after cryptogenic stroke. The annual absolute risk reduction of stroke was low, but it has to be tempered by a substantial time at risk (at least 5 years) in young and middle-aged patients. PFO closure was associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation.

Indexed as

Cardiac CatheterizationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationEmbolism, ParadoxicalFemaleForamen Ovale, PatentHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnticoagulantsPlatelet Aggregation Inhibitorsanticoagulationpatent foramen ovalepatent foramen ovale closurestroke

Identifiers

PMID29910193
PMCPMC6220551
OpenAlexW2808343426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.