ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
The safety, efficacy, and influencing factors of biodegradable versus metallic occluders in the treatment of migraine patients with patent foramen ovale.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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
- Fully biodegradable versus nitinol occluder devices for transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure: a systematic review.Global cardiology science & practice · 2026Review
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
Objective: Compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable versus metallic occluders in the treatment of migraine patients with patent foramen ovale (PFO), and analyze the predictive factors for migraine attack relief. Method: A single-center retrospective study included 133 patients diagnosed with migraine with PFO in Hefei High-Tech Cardiovascular Hospital from January 2021 to June 2024; 56 cases were treated with biodegradable occluders, and 77 cases were treated with metallic occluders. Collect preoperative baseline data, use the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire and monthly attack days to assess symptoms, and evaluate efficacy at 1-year follow-up after surgery. Effectiveness is defined as complete elimination of migraine symptoms or a reduction of ≥ 50% in monthly attack days. Results: The postoperative MIDAS score (biodegradable group: 10.45 ± 9.19 vs. metallic group: 11.32 ± 9.62, Conclusion: PFO closure can markedly alleviate symptoms in migraine patients with PFO. Both biodegradable and metallic occluders exhibit comparable efficacy in symptom improvement and safety at the 12-month postoperative mark. Patients presenting with more severe baseline migraine, RLS at rest, and elevated PCT may derive greater benefit from PFO closure, whereas lower CRP levels may portend a more favorable prognosis for those with metallic occluders. Biodegradable occluders may become a better choice for specific populations (such as young patients and those allergic to nickel).
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.