Cargando…

Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patent foramen ovale (PFO) patients with cryptic stroke remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PFO closure versus different types of medical therapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pan, Xuemei, Xu, Liang, Zhou, Chang, Zhang, Zhi, Sun, Heng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34160457
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000026473
_version_ 1783714889564422144
author Pan, Xuemei
Xu, Liang
Zhou, Chang
Zhang, Zhi
Sun, Heng
author_facet Pan, Xuemei
Xu, Liang
Zhou, Chang
Zhang, Zhi
Sun, Heng
author_sort Pan, Xuemei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patent foramen ovale (PFO) patients with cryptic stroke remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PFO closure versus different types of medical therapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary efficacy endpoints were the composite outcome of recurrent stroke and/or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Secondary efficacy endpoints included separate stroke and TIA. Safety endpoints included new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter and bleeding. RESULTS: Compared with antiplatelet therapy, PFO closure significantly reduced the risk of composite outcome (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27–0.51), stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13–0.36], and TIA (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34–0.98); Compared with the mixed medical therapy group (consist of antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulant therapy, or both), PFO closure still showed some benefits, but the effect was not as significant as that of antiplatelet therapy (composite outcome: OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41–0.69; stroke: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34–0.68; TIA: OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50–0.96); Compared with anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure showed no benefit (composite outcome: OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46–1.28; stroke: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28–1.25; TIA: OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.50–2.04). In terms of safe endpoints, compared with antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 9.56, 95% CI 2.85–32.06; OR 18.96, 95% CI 1.11–323.8, respectively) and reduced the risk of bleeding (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24–1.05; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04–0.46, respectively); compared with mixed medical therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 4.40,95% CI 2.24–8.67), but there was no difference in bleeding (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56–1.68). CONCLUSIONS: With the addition of anticoagulants, the benefit of PFO closure decreased gradually. Patient groups that adopt individualized medical therapy strategies may benefit more.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8238362
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82383622021-07-06 Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type Pan, Xuemei Xu, Liang Zhou, Chang Zhang, Zhi Sun, Heng Medicine (Baltimore) 5300 BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patent foramen ovale (PFO) patients with cryptic stroke remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PFO closure versus different types of medical therapy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary efficacy endpoints were the composite outcome of recurrent stroke and/or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Secondary efficacy endpoints included separate stroke and TIA. Safety endpoints included new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter and bleeding. RESULTS: Compared with antiplatelet therapy, PFO closure significantly reduced the risk of composite outcome (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27–0.51), stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13–0.36], and TIA (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34–0.98); Compared with the mixed medical therapy group (consist of antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulant therapy, or both), PFO closure still showed some benefits, but the effect was not as significant as that of antiplatelet therapy (composite outcome: OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41–0.69; stroke: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34–0.68; TIA: OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50–0.96); Compared with anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure showed no benefit (composite outcome: OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46–1.28; stroke: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28–1.25; TIA: OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.50–2.04). In terms of safe endpoints, compared with antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulant therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 9.56, 95% CI 2.85–32.06; OR 18.96, 95% CI 1.11–323.8, respectively) and reduced the risk of bleeding (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24–1.05; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04–0.46, respectively); compared with mixed medical therapy, PFO closure increased the risk of AF/atrial flutter (OR 4.40,95% CI 2.24–8.67), but there was no difference in bleeding (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56–1.68). CONCLUSIONS: With the addition of anticoagulants, the benefit of PFO closure decreased gradually. Patient groups that adopt individualized medical therapy strategies may benefit more. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8238362/ /pubmed/34160457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000026473 Text en Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
spellingShingle 5300
Pan, Xuemei
Xu, Liang
Zhou, Chang
Zhang, Zhi
Sun, Heng
Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title_full Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title_fullStr Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title_full_unstemmed Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title_short Meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: Impact of medication type
title_sort meta-analysis of patent foramen ovale closure versus medical therapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic neurological events: impact of medication type
topic 5300
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34160457
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000026473
work_keys_str_mv AT panxuemei metaanalysisofpatentforamenovaleclosureversusmedicaltherapyforpreventionofrecurrentischemicneurologicaleventsimpactofmedicationtype
AT xuliang metaanalysisofpatentforamenovaleclosureversusmedicaltherapyforpreventionofrecurrentischemicneurologicaleventsimpactofmedicationtype
AT zhouchang metaanalysisofpatentforamenovaleclosureversusmedicaltherapyforpreventionofrecurrentischemicneurologicaleventsimpactofmedicationtype
AT zhangzhi metaanalysisofpatentforamenovaleclosureversusmedicaltherapyforpreventionofrecurrentischemicneurologicaleventsimpactofmedicationtype
AT sunheng metaanalysisofpatentforamenovaleclosureversusmedicaltherapyforpreventionofrecurrentischemicneurologicaleventsimpactofmedicationtype