ReviewCureus2025
Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) Closure in Thrombophilia as Primary Prevention in Patients Without Prior PFO-Associated Thromboembolic Events.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a common anatomical variant with potential clinical implications in embolic phenomena. In some situations, transcatheter closure is considered a treatment option. For patients with thrombophilia who have not had embolic events, it is not always clear whether this approach is appropriate. Individuals with clotting disorders may face different considerations, and approaches can vary between cases. This study was conducted based on the PICO-formatted research question: Population - thrombophilic patients with no history of embolic events; Intervention - PFO closure; Comparison - medical therapy; Outcome - stroke prevention. We focused on asymptomatic individuals due to their theoretical but unproven elevated risk of stroke and the current absence of specific guidelines for primary prevention. Studies addressing PFO screening and management in thrombophilic patients without a prior history of stroke or embolic events were included. English-language articles published up to December 2024 were reviewed using data extracted from MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. The included studies primarily consisted of observational designs, such as prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series, which collectively provided the evidence base for evaluating PFO management strategies in patients with thrombophilia. After full-text screening, only one retrospective cohort study met our inclusion criteria. This study of 136 thrombophilic patients with PFO, all maintained on antithrombotic therapy, found that primary percutaneous PFO closure was independently associated with a nearly five-fold reduction in the risk of cerebrovascular accident or transient ischemic attack (adjusted hazard ratio 0.18; 95% CI: 0.03-0.3; p = 0.001), demonstrating a statistically significant benefit of closure in this high-risk population. Although this result suggests a potential benefit of early intervention, the evidence remains limited and non-randomized. These findings should be viewed as hypothesis-generating, highlighting the need for prospective studies to better define the role of PFO closure in this specific population and to inform future guideline development.
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.