ArticleDie Anaesthesiologie2026
Patent foramen ovale, bone cement implantation syndrome and paradoxical embolism : Case study and pathophysiological aspects.
Article in Die Anaesthesiologie, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with a patent foramen ovale (PFO) have an increased risk of perioperative cerebral stroke due to the potential for paradoxical embolism. It is pathophysiologically plausible that this risk is further increased when bone cement implantation syndrome (BCIS) occurs during endoprosthetic joint surgery; however, despite double-digit prevalence rates for both PFO and BCIS, the perioperative concurrence of these conditions with subsequent paradoxical embolism has not previously been reported.We describe an 81-year-old woman with a known PFO who developed intraoperative BCIS during cemented hip arthroplasty and subsequently sustained a paradoxical embolic stroke involving a large cerebral vessel. The potential pathophysiological links between PFO and BCIS are discussed, and anesthesiological implications and practical recommendations are derived from the current literature.Published estimates of paradoxical embolism risk during endoprosthetic joint replacement are highly inconsistent, ranging from no increased risk to a 29-fold increase. This variability may partly reflect that many embolic events remain clinically silent.For paradoxical embolism two conditions are required: (1) gaseous or particulate emboli must enter the venous circulation and (2) the physiological left-to-right interatrial shunt must reverse to a right-to-left shunt through the PFO. Both mechanisms can be promoted by BCIS by generating embolic load from the surgical field and increasing pulmonary vascular resistance, thereby favoring right-to-left shunting. Because specific anesthesiological preventive and therapeutic options are limited, close postoperative monitoring is essential and any new neurological or hemodynamic abnormalities should prompt immediate comprehensive diagnostic evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42319467What 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.