SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic events in patients with cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack and documented patent foramen ovale: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure and medical therapy categories, including antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation, and mixed medical therapy. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to June 22, 2026. Eligible randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing PFO closure with medical therapy in adult patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and confirmed PFO were included. Results: Eighteen studies involving 7,135 participants, including six randomized controlled trials and 12 observational studies, were included. Four intervention nodes were analyzed: PFO closure, antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation, and mixed medical therapy. For recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events, PFO closure was associated with a lower risk than antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12-0.41), anticoagulation (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19-0.82), and mixed medical therapy (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33-0.77). For bleeding events, PFO closure was associated with a significantly lower risk than anticoagulation (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.06-0.42), while the comparisons with antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20-1.23) and mixed medical therapy (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.46-1.79) did not reach statistical significance. Model-fit assessment showed similar DIC values between the consistency and unrelated mean-effects models. Conclusions: PFO closure showed the most favorable efficacy profile for preventing recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events and was associated with a significantly lower bleeding risk than anticoagulation. However, safety findings for comparisons with antiplatelet therapy and mixed medical therapy should be interpreted cautiously because bleeding events were sparse and confidence intervals were wide. Systematic Review Registration: CRD420251148908.
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.