ArticleClinical cardiology2021
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.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of patent foramen ovale closure in patients over 60 years with cryptogenic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2026Pooled it
- Patent Foramen Ovale: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, Clinical Features, Diagnosis, and Management.MedComm · 2026Review
- Asian-Pacific Expert Opinion on Patent Foramen Ovale Closure: Review of New Evidence and Focused Update.Journal of stroke · 2025Review
- Clinical research progress on pathogenesis and treatment of Patent Foramen Ovale-associated stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Determinants of adverse outcomes following patent foramen ovale closure in elderly patients.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Special Clinical Situations: More Questions Than Answers?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Long-term risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events after patent foramen ovale closure: Results from a real-world stroke cohort.European stroke journal · 2023Article
- Cerebrovascular Events in Older Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Journal of stroke · 2023Review
- 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.Clinical cardiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent 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.
methodsWe 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.
resultsFollow-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.
conclusionsInterventional 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.
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.