ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Case Report: Is there an age cutoff beyond which PFO closure should not be offered?
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While randomized controlled trials have confirmed that patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure over medical therapy is considered the preferred treatment of young patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS), the efficacy of percutaneous closure in elderly subjects with high-risk PFO remains unclear since no randomized trials are currently available. Case summary: A 65-year-old man with a past medical history of hyperuricemia, chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease, intestinal diverticulosis, and long-lasting arterial hypertension with enlargement of the aortic root was admitted for evaluation of the sudden onset of diplopia, postural instability, and subtotal loss of consciousness. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confirmed an acute left thalamo-mesencephalic infarct. Continuous ECG monitoring ruled out atrial fibrillation (AFib). Two-dimensional (2D) transthoracic/transesophageal echocardiography (TTE/TEE) color Doppler showed a significant right-to-left shunt (RLS) via a tunnel-type PFO associated with hypermobile floppy septum primum (HSP) and prominent Eustachian valve (EV). Of note, a significant enlargement of the aortic root and ascending aorta resulted in a remarkable compression of the right atrial cavity and reduction of the interatrial septum (IAS) length, proportionally increasing its mobility and thus the amount of RLS. Following heart-brain team discussion, transcatheter PFO closure was recommended. After written informed consent, the patient underwent a successful percutaneous PFO closure with a self-expanding double-disk nitinol mesh PFO device (18/24 mm MemoPart) under local anesthesia and mild sedation, with fluoroscopic and rotational intracardiac echocardiography (rICE) guidance using a 9 F-9 MHz Ultra ICE catheter-based ultrasound probe. Two-month follow-up with 2D contrast TTE color Doppler and contrast-enhanced transcranial Doppler (c-TCD) showed correct device position, with no residual shunt. Discussion: Enlargement of the aortic root with increasing age may reorientate horizontally the IAS, allowing part of the flow to stream directly toward the PFO, decrease the size and length of IAS, and proportionally increase its mobility, thus uncovering latent or previously trivial RLSs in older hypertensive patients suffering from ESUS.
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.