ArticleCureus2026
Lost to Follow-Up After Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) Closure: Late Detection of Abdominal Aortic Embolization of an Occluder Device.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Embolization of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) occluder is a rare complication, particularly when detected years after device implantation. We report a case of a 30-year-old patient who initially presented with acute right lower limb ischemia caused by embolic occlusion of multiple arteries. A floating thrombus was detected in the inferior vena cava, and subsequent evaluation revealed a PFO, a bicuspid aortic valve, and an aortic arch anomaly. Six weeks later, PFO closure was performed using a 25 mm Amplatzer Cribriform device (Abbott, Chicago, Illinois), followed by appropriate post-procedural antithrombotic therapy. Nearly five years after implantation, routine follow-up revealed asymptomatic embolization of the occluder to the suprarenal abdominal aorta at the level of the superior mesenteric artery, without evidence of limb or renal hypoperfusion; the exact timing of embolization could not be determined. Percutaneous retrieval was attempted but aborted due to pain and the high risk of aortic injury, and the device was therefore left in situ. This case highlights a rare late complication of PFO closure and underscores the importance of long-term surveillance in patients with complex cardiovascular anatomy and thrombotic risk factors.
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.