ArticleJACC. Case reports2025
Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Right Ventricular Failure on Mechanical Circulatory Support: To Close or Not?
Article in JACC. Case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patent Foramen Ovale: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Pathophysiology, Clinical Features, Diagnosis, and Management.MedComm · 2026Review
- Heart-Rate-Dependent Right-to-Left Shunting Through a Patent Foramen Ovale in Severe Right Ventricular Dysfunction: A Case Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
backgroundRight-to-left shunting through a patent foramen ovale (PFO) can cause severe hypoxemia in right ventricular (RV) failure; however, closure may worsen RV function and risk hemodynamic collapse. CASE SUMMARY: A 40-year-old man with arrhythmogenic RV dysplasia and profound RV failure developed refractory hypoxemia due to a large PFO while supported on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic balloon pump. After multidisciplinary assessment, he underwent successful percutaneous PFO closure, leading to improved oxygenation, RV stability, and decannulation from mechanical circulatory support. DISCUSSION: This rare case involving dual mechanical support illustrates the complexity of managing PFOs in RV failure. It challenges conventional caution against closure and emphasizes the importance of individualized, team-based decision-making guided by careful physiological assessment. TAKE-HOME MESSAGES: PFO closure may be feasible in RV failure with mechanical circulatory support. Multidisciplinary planning is essential to optimize outcomes.
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.