ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2021
Treatment Strategies for Cryptogenic Stroke Patients with Patent Foramen Ovale: What Do We Choose?
Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
importanceThe treatment of cryptogenic stroke patients with patent foramen ovale to prevent recurrence of stroke, especially when patients consider drug prevention alone, has caused serious treatment dilemmas in clinical practice.
objectiveTo study the safety and efficacy of different treatment strategies using a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in this population with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale. STUDY SELECTION: PUBMED, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, WangFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched to identify RCT comparing different treatment strategies. Eleven randomized studies were included (n = 5706). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy outcome was recurrence of ischemic stroke, including fatal and non-fatal ischemic strokes. The primary safety outcome was major hemorrhage, but closure surgery includes systemic thrombotic events, persistent atrial fibrillation, surgical deaths and other major events.
resultsIn terms of efficacy and safety events, compared with antiplatelet, the OR of vitamin K antagonists for stroke recurrence was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.41-1.6), the OR of surgical closure was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.16-0.63), and the OR of NOAC was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.27-2.3). Compared with antiplatelet, the safety event OR of vitamin K antagonists was 1.7 (95% CI, 0.65-4.8), the OR of surgical closure was 1.7 (95% CI, 0.68-3.8), and the OR of NOAC was 2.2 (95% CI, 0.67-7.6).
conclusionIn terms of effectiveness, surgical occlusion has the best performance, while anticoagulation is the second best. Vitamin K antagonists and non-vitamin K antagonists are difficult to distinguish between the best in effectiveness. Antiplatelet drugs are considered the worst option. Regarding the safety results, it is generally believed that there are no obvious beneficial interventions, but antiplatelet drugs are considered to be relatively best, followed by surgical intervention and vitamin K antagonists, and non-vitamin K antagonists are considered to be the least safe.
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.