ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2025
Aortic dilation might be a risk factor for early cardiac perforation after interventional closure of patent foramen ovale: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 2025. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is present in ∼20% of adults and is associated with cryptogenic stroke, recurrent transient neurological deficit, decompression illness, and migraines. In patients with high probability of a PFO-related ischaemic event, the preferred management strategy is the endovascular closure of the PFO, whenever feasible. Cardiac erosion or perforation is an unusual event after the interventional closure of a PFO, but its occurrence portends a life-threatening potential. Therefore, clinicians should be aware of this serious complication when faced with acute cardiac tamponade in a patient with a history of PFO closure. Case summary: We report the case of a 57-year-old man, with a recent PFO-related ischaemic stroke, who presented for elective endovascular closure of the PFO. Patent foramen ovale and surrounding structures seemed amenable for closure, and recommended a 25-mm Amplatzer device. Isolated dilation of the aortic bulb was noted by transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE), but with normal valve morphology and no aortic regurgitation. The procedure was performed without complications, and 24 h echo follow-up showed no impingement of the device on the surrounding structures. However, 36 h after the procedure, the patient developed sudden chest pain and cardiac tamponade. Emergency cardiac surgery with intra-operative TEE guidance revealed right atrial and aortic bulb perforation caused by the larger right disc of the occluder. The device was removed, and the defects were sutured. The patient was discharged within 14 days after the event, with no further complications. Discussion: Perforation of the aortic root is a very rare complication after interventional PFO closure. This complication usually occurs at a long distance after the procedure, and is associated with oversized devices, deficient or absent aortic rim, or misalignment of the defect with the aorta. Our patient presented none of the above, but a moderate dilation of the aortic bulb, which might have triggered the rapid erosion and perforation.
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.