Stortecky Stefan, Windecker Stephan
Swiss Cardiovascular Centre Bern, Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Bern, Switzerland.
Interv Cardiol. 2015 Feb;10(1):45-48. doi: 10.15420/icr.2015.10.1.45.
Data from epidemiologic studies have indicated a close association between the presence of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) and cryptogenic stroke that is suggestive of paradoxical embolism as the underlying cause. Percutaneous closure of PFO has been proposed for the secondary prevention among patients suffering from paradoxical embolism. While observational data support this strategy, three randomized trials investigating percutaneous PFO closure with medical therapy have failed to detect a statistically significant reduction of the primary endpoint of recurrent ischemic cerebrovascular events, peripheral embolism, and death in the intention-to-treat analysis. Several reasons have been discussed as basis for the negative primary study results, including long recruitment rates, low number of recurrent events, and the use of different devices. In order to provide an answer to these unresolved factors, several meta-analyses have been published that have provided conflicting results. This article will review the available evidence of percutaneous PFO closure, will provide an overview on randomized clinical trials, and summarize the evidence from meta-analyses.
流行病学研究数据表明,卵圆孔未闭(PFO)与隐源性卒中之间存在密切关联,提示矛盾栓塞可能是其潜在病因。对于矛盾栓塞患者,已提出经皮封堵PFO用于二级预防。虽然观察性数据支持这一策略,但三项比较经皮PFO封堵与药物治疗的随机试验在意向性分析中均未发现复发性缺血性脑血管事件、外周栓塞和死亡等主要终点有统计学意义的降低。已讨论了几个导致主要研究结果为阴性的原因,包括入组率低、复发事件数量少以及使用不同的器械。为了回答这些未解决的因素,已发表了几项荟萃分析,但结果相互矛盾。本文将回顾经皮PFO封堵的现有证据,概述随机临床试验,并总结荟萃分析的证据。