ArticleCureus2025
Paradoxical Thalamic Infarction via Patent Foramen Ovale in an Athletic Young Adult: A Case Report.
Article 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cryptogenic ischemic stroke represents a significant diagnostic challenge in young adults. A patent foramen ovale (PFO) is an increasingly recognized potential etiology, facilitating paradoxical embolism. We report the case of an 18-year-old athletic female who presented with acute neurological symptoms consistent with a right thalamic ischemic stroke, confirmed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Extensive workup excluded common stroke causes, and the case fulfilled Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (ESUS) criteria. A PFO was identified via contrast transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography (TTE and TEE). The patient underwent successful percutaneous PFO closure approximately four weeks after symptom onset and achieved full neurological recovery. This case highlights PFO as a crucial consideration in the differential diagnosis of cryptogenic stroke in young, otherwise healthy individuals. It underscores the importance of comprehensive investigation, including contrast echocardiography, and supports PFO closure in appropriately selected patients, such as those under 60 years of age with non-lacunar cryptogenic stroke and confirmed PFO, consistent with current evidence.
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.