| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Stroke. 2000;31:2407.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.
Original Contributions |
Morphological and Functional Characteristics of Patent Foramen Ovale and Their Embolic Implications
From the Departments of Clinical Medicine (S.D.C., D.C.), Cardiovascular and Respiratory Sciences (F.F.), and Neurological Sciences (M.F., M.R., A.A., E.M.Z., M.B., C.C., C.F.), "La Sapienza" University, Rome, Italy; and the New England Medical Center (N.G.P.), Tufts University, Boston, Mass.
Correspondence to Stefano De Castro, MD, Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica, Policlinico Umberto I, Viale del Policlinico, 00161 Rome, Italy. E-mail migliau{at}axcasp.caspur.it
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Background and Purpose—Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has detected a high prevalence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in stroke patients, but the clinical implications of the distinctive characteristics of this patency are still a matter of debate.
Methods—We studied 350 patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) within 1 week of admission. Of these, 101 (29%) were identified by contrast TEE to have a PFO; 86 patients (25%) were cryptogenic stroke patients, and 163 were excluded because of the presence of a definite or possible arterial or clinical evidence of a source of emboli or small-vessel disease. Thirteen PFO subjects without a history of embolism were designated as the control group. All PFO and cryptogenic stroke patients were followed up by neurological visits.
Results—Compared with controls, PFO patients with acute stroke or TIA more frequently presented with a right-to-left shunt at rest and a higher membrane mobility (P<0.05). Patients with these characteristics were considered to be at high risk. During a median follow-up period of 31 months (range, 4 to 58 months), 8 PFO and 18 cryptogenic stroke patients experienced recurrent cerebrovascular events. The cumulative estimate of risk of cerebrovascular event recurrence at 3 years was 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0% to 10.2%) for "low-risk" PFO patients, 12.5% (95% CI, 0% to 26.1%) for "high-risk" PFO patients, and 16.3% (95% CI, 7.2% to 25.4%) for cryptogenic stroke patients (high-risk PFO versus low-risk PFO, P=0.05).
Conclusions—The association of right-to-left shunting at rest and high membrane mobility, as detected by contrast TEE, seems to identify PFO patients with cerebrovascular ischemic events who are at higher risk for recurrent brain embolism.
Key Words: cerebral ischemia • echocardiography • embolism • foramen ovale, patent
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Several studies with saline-contrast transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) have suggested an increased prevalence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in patients with unexplained cerebral ischemia.1 2 3 4 5 However, the clinical significance of PFO is still, at present, a matter of debate.6 7 8
Recently, reports have been presented that characterize the distinctive echocardiographic characteristics of this abnormality and their relationship with paradoxical cerebral embolism.9 10 Our study was designed to (1) define the morphological characteristics of the PFO in patients with acute stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and in normal subjects and (2) investigate and compare the recurrence of clinical stroke or TIA in PFO and cryptogenic stroke patients.
|
Subjects and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Subjects
From November 1992 to October 1996, all patients with acute stroke or TIA admitted to the Department of Neurological Sciences at the University of Rome "La Sapienza" were screened for enrollment in the study. Stroke was defined as a focal neurological deficit of sudden onset that persisted beyond 24 hours in surviving patients11 ; TIA was defined as a focal neurological deficit resolving completely within 24 hours.11 Particular attention was taken to exclude episodes of transient global amnesia, loss of consciousness, fainting episodes, and focal symptoms associated with migraine headache12 that could have been misdiagnosed as TIA.
All patients underwent general medical and neurological examinations, chest radiography, general blood chemistry assay, and electrocardiography. Cerebrovascular risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, obesity, hypercholesterolemia and/or hypertriglyceridemia, cigarette smoking, and contraceptive drug use were fully investigated. In addition, the presence and number of clinical cerebral ischemic episodes that had occurred before admission were screened. Moreover, all patients underwent carotid duplex (B-mode and Doppler) scanning, transcranial Doppler ultrasound, and cerebral CT and/or MRI.
This workup allowed us to classify the patients into different pathogenetic groups, in accordance with the modified criteria of Amarenco et al13 : (1) patients with a definite or possible arterial or cardiac source of emboli; (2) patients with small-vessel disease; and (3) patients who could not be classified into either of the above groups (stroke or TIA of undetermined origin).
Cardiac Imaging
By these criteria, all patients with stroke or TIA of
undetermined origin were subjected to transthoracic and,
immediately afterward, saline-contrast TEE examinations.
Echocardiographic studies were performed by using
commercially available ultrasound systems with 2.5- and 3.5-MHz
transthoracic probes and 5-MHz biplane or 5-/3.7-MHz
multiplane transesophageal probes.
The saline-contrast study was performed both during normal respiration and during the Valsalva maneuver. In our experience, the most appropriate way to perform a diagnostic Valsalva maneuver is by asking the patient to start the maneuver at the moment of injection and to release the strain after complete opacification of the right atrium.14 The Valsalva maneuver was considered to have been correctly performed when the atrial septal membrane bulged into the left atrium. Informed consent for the saline-contrast TEE was obtained from all patients, and no complications occurred during the procedures.
Echocardiographic Criteria
A positive contrast examination was defined when 3 or more
microbubbles appeared in the left atrium (Figure 1
). The maximum number of shunted
microbubbles visualized in a single frame, both during normal breathing
and when induced by the Valsalva maneuver, within 3 cardiac cycles
after entire right atrium opacification was counted. Contrast studies
during a Valsalva maneuver were repeated when the first injection
yielded a negative or a questionable result.
|
We considered the following parameters (Figure 2): (1) Fossa ovalis diameter; (2) septum
primum membrane length; (3) fossa ovalis diameter–to–membrane length
ratio; 4) PFO 1D and 2D diameter (in the vertical plane, the maximum
opening between the septum primum and the septum secundum was measured
at rest); and (5) membrane mobility. The sum of excursions at rest (the
greatest leftward and rightward deflections of the septum primum with
respect to a perpendicular line to the fossa ovalis plane) into either
the left or right atrium of the membrane was calculated. All
echocardiographic examinations were recorded on VHS
videotape. All measurements were independently analyzed by
offline frame-by-frame analysis by 2 cardiologists who were
expert in echocardiography without their knowledge
of the patient’s clinical history or diagnostic workup
results.
|
Exclusion Criteria
To eliminate factors that might influence analysis of
the specific morphological characteristics of PFO, we excluded from
further analysis those patients with poor visualization of the
fossa ovalis area, those with both PFO and a valve insufficiency graded
more than mild (able to alter the cardiac chamber
hemodynamic conditions), or those with left-to-right
shunt as detected by color Doppler techniques (considered to
represent small, atrial septal defects).
Follow-Up Information
Clinical data of PFO and cryptogenic stroke patients were
regularly recorded by neurologists twice a year during a medical
visit. Death due to brain infarct and new episodes of ischemic
stroke and TIA were considered recurrent events. The diagnosis of
stroke or TIA and death due to cerebral infarct was confirmed by CT
scan or autopsy, respectively, in all cases.
Data Analysis
Thirteen consecutive PFO subjects, without a history of cerebral
or systemic ischemia and with no detectable cardiac
abnormalities other than right-to-left shunting, were selected as the
control group. Statistical analysis was performed by the
Mann-Whitney U test, ANOVA, 
2 test,
or Fisher’s exact test. The agreement between the 2 raters on TEE
parameters was assessed by using Spearman’s correlation
and the paired t test. Actuarial life-table analysis
was used to estimate the risk of recurrent cerebrovascular events. A
value of P<0.05 was considered significant. A Cox
proportional-hazards model was used to account for potential
confounding factors. All analyses were performed with
BMDP statistical
software.15
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Patients
Using saline-contrast TEE, we studied 350 patients within 1 week of acute ischemic stroke or TIA. An intracardiac right-to-left shunt was detected in 101 patients (29%). In accordance with the above-mentioned criteria, we excluded 27 patients for the following reasons: contemporaneous presence of moderate-to-severe aortic and/or mitral valve insufficiency in 10; left-to-right–associated shunting due to small, atrial septal defects in 11; and poor visualization of the fossa ovalis area in 6.
The remaining 74 PFO stroke patients (mean age, 53±14 years) were characterized as follows: 56 patients with "PFO alone" (ie, without any other detectable embolic source); and 18 patients with PFO and other potential cardiac or aortic sources of associated emboli, represented by complicated atheromatous lesions of the ascending aorta and/or arch in 9; mitral valve prolapse with a myxomatous valvular structure in 4; mitral and/or aortic valve fibrinous strands in 3; and massive mitral valve calcific degeneration in 2.
One-hundred sixty-three patients were excluded because of the presence of a definite or possible arterial or clinical evidence of the source of emboli or small-vessel disease. The remaining 86 cryptogenic stroke patients (mean age, 47±14 years) completed the follow-up period, and their data were available for comparison in assessing the recurrent risk of ischemic events.
The control group was represented by 13 healthy PFO subjects without previous cerebral or systemic embolism who were underwent TEE for suspected heart disease (n=7), for scuba diving fitness (n=4), or for nondiagnostic transthoracic imaging (n=2). In all control subjects, echocardiographic examinations showed no morphological or functional cardiac abnormalities other than PFO. Control subjects were neither followed up nor subjected to further neurological and instrumental workup.
Clinical Characteristics
No significant differences were detected with respect to classic
cerebral ischemia risk factors among PFO and cryptogenic stroke
patients versus controls. All patients were in sinus rhythm, and none
presented clinical symptoms or
echocardiographic findings of increased
pulmonary pressure values.
Morphological and Functional Characteristics of PFO
The morphological and functional echocardiographic
findings of the fossa ovalis structures in stroke/TIA patients and
controls with PFO are listed in the
Table. The prevalence of patency during
normal breathing (ie, PFO at rest) was significantly higher
(P=0.04) in patients with stroke or TIA as opposed to
controls. Moreover, an increased fossa ovalis membrane mobility
(P=0.04) was detected in PFO patients with stroke or
TIA.
|
Recurrent Events During Follow-Up
No patient with PFO and acute stroke or TIA was lost to follow-up.
During a median follow-up period of 31 months (range, 4 to 58 months),
8 (11%) patients suffered a new cerebrovascular event. Of these, 5 had
a stroke (fatal event in 3 cases) and 3 had a TIA. Two patients died of
neoplasm.
Eighty-six patients with cryptogenic acute stroke or TIA completed the follow-up period (median of 34 months; range, 5 to 60 months); 18 (21%) experienced a new cerebrovascular event. Of these, 11 had a stroke (no cases of related death) and 7 had a TIA. The recurrent cerebrovascular event occurred in patients who were taking 250 to 500 mg of aspirin and oral anticoagulants, with a targeted International Normalized Ratio between 2 and 3, as well as in patients not receiving such treatment.
To devise a risk scale for clinical event recurrence, data for
patency at rest and membrane mobility were used to group PFO patients
as follows: the high-risk group (n=27), including those with PFO at
rest and membrane mobility >6.5 mm; and the low-risk group
(n=47), including those with PFO (either at rest or during the Valsalva
maneuver) and membrane mobility 
6.5 mm, or those with membrane
mobility >6.5 mm with PFO during the Valsalva maneuver only. The
cutoff of 6.5 mm was chosen because it represented the
median value of membrane mobility for the total PFO population.
The overall cumulative estimate of risk of stroke or TIA
recurrence, at 3 years of follow-up, in the whole cohort of
patients with PFO was 7.2% (95% CI, 1% to 13.5%), as opposed to
16.3% (95% CI, 7.2% to 25.4%) for patients with cryptogenic stroke
(P=0.3) (Figure 3).
Age-adjusted analysis did not reveal any statistical difference
between cryptogenic and PFO patients in terms of risk of
cerebrovascular ischemic recurrence. When PFO patients
were analyzed separately, the risk of stroke or TIA
recurrence, at 3 years of follow-up, was 4.3% (95% CI, 0% to
10.2%) for those with the low-risk pattern and 12.5% (95% CI, 0% to
26.1%) for those with the high-risk profile (P=0.05)
(Figure 4).
|
|
Moreover, when only stroke events were considered in the
analysis of follow-up data, the estimate of the risk of stroke
recurrence, at 3 years of follow-up, was 2.1% (95% CI, 0% to
6.3%) for low-risk PFO patients, 5.3% (95% CI, 0% to 15.5%) for
high-risk PFO patients, and 10.2% (95% CI, 2.8% to 17.6%) for
cryptogenic stroke patients (Figures 5 and 6). These results were not modified
by adjustment for age, vascular risk factors, and treatment, as
performed with the Cox proportional-hazards model.
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
PFO is the anatomic means by which paradoxical embolic stroke is generally believed to develop,16 17 18 and saline-contrast TEE with provocative maneuvers is considered the method of choice in detecting it during life.4 19 However, whereas in a stroke population a higher PFO prevalence is found, demonstration of deep venous thrombosis or an elevation of right heart pressure values, thus permitting a shunt, is usually lacking.6 For this reason, several studies have focused on the anatomic and functional echocardiographic findings to define which PFOs are to be considered risk condition for stroke. A more severe right-to-left shunt and a larger opening of the PFO have been identified as the main characteristics in evaluating the likelihood of paradoxical embolism in stroke patients.20 21 22 23 On the other hand, the separation between the septum primum and septum secundum, and hence the degree of shunt, may vary from cardiac cycle to cardiac cycle as the hemodynamic and respiratory conditions change.24 25 Moreover, because of its anatomic characteristics (ie, short and angled conduit), it is usually neither simple nor correct to obtain measures of the maximum size of the opening, even by using high-frequency imaging systems. Regarding the semiquantitative grading of PFO shunting, several conditions seem to work against its use as a marker of increased risk for paradoxical embolism. In fact, the maximum degree of shunting is usually reached during provocative maneuvers (ie, Valsalva or cough), which are sometimes not obtainable by stroke patients, and these almost always differ from each other in the type and level of strain exerted. Moreover, the microbubble count is derived from a single 2D imaging plane, and this analysis does not reflect the exact amount of shunting.
The results of the present study suggest that a right-to-left shunt at rest, in the absence of a significant increase in right atrial mean pressure, is a marker of risk for cerebral ischemia in patients with PFO. Because of its valvelike nature, PFO may permit right-to-left shunting as the result of a transient, instantaneous pressure gradient between the right and left atria during the cardiac cycle, even without the need for pathological (ie, pulmonary hypertension states) or physiological (ie, Valsalva maneuvers or correlates) augmentation.26 To clarify this potential risk condition, one may suppose that patients who already have a shunt during quiet breathing have an increased exposure time for paradoxical embolism, as opposed to those with a shunt induced by provocative maneuvers only. As shown by clinical practice, the low pathophysiological importance of provocative-only shunts has been documented. In fact, no correlations were found between circumstances able to increase right cardiac chamber pressure (ie, sporting effort, lifting a heavy weight, coughing, and others considered as equivalents of the Valsalva maneuver) immediately preceding stroke onset and the presence of PFO.6
Our patients with PFO also had an associated increased fossa ovalis membrane mobility. With regard to this point, the boundary between "redundant mobile membrane" and "atrial septal aneurysm" is not a well-defined issue.27 28 Pearson and coworkers29 considered the sum of the excursions into the left and right atria >11 mm, with a fossa ovalis width >15 mm, as an echocardiographic diagnostic criterion. It should be noted that in the absence of anatomic and noninvasive "gold standard" criteria for the identification of true atrial septal aneurysm, every given definition may appear arbitrary.5 30 Nevertheless, atrial septal aneurysm has been correlated to ischemic stroke by several postulated mechanisms (ie, locus of thrombus generation, induction of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, or association with mitral valve prolapse). The most plausible of these appears to be the underlying presence of interatrial communication.30 In fact, Mugge et al,31 in a large, multicenter, echocardiographic study of atrial septal aneurysm patients, found no morphological differences between those with and without previous cardiogenic embolism; only was an associated interatrial shunt significantly more frequent in patients with possible embolism. This conclusion has also been addressed by other investigators.32 33
The increased mobility of the fossa ovalis membrane in patients with
PFO may play a significant role in permitting paradoxical shunt via a
mechanical action in directing blood through the conduit. The
preferential orientation of flow from the inferior vena
cava is directed toward the foramen ovale through the eustachian valve,
and it may be favored and enhanced by the flap motion of the membrane
(Figure 7).
|
PFO Patients at Higher Risk for Recurrent Cerebral
Embolism
Our study demonstrates that there are no differences between PFO
and cryptogenetic stroke patients in terms of risk of recurrent
cerebrovascular ischemic events. Moreover, even when stroke is
analyzed separately from TIA, no significant results could be
found between these 2 groups.
Few studies concerning cerebrovascular ischemic recurrence in PFO patients are available. This is partly due to its low incidence, as reported by Bogousslavsky et al,34 who demonstrated a rate of 3.8% per year of recurrent, nonfatal cerebrovascular ischemia during a 3-year follow-up period. Mas et al,35 investigating adult patients with PFO and a prior cerebrovascular ischemic event, detected a 6.7% risk rate for stroke or TIA at 2 years, with an increased rate to 9.0% in patients with both PFO and an atrial septal aneurysm. In addition, the potential synergistic effects of PFO and an atrial septal aneurysm with a >10-mm excursion have been postulated in a previous study of prevalence among young stroke patients <55 years of age.5 Our PFO stroke patients presented a similar recurrence rate of a stroke or TIA event (7.2% at 3 years). When high-risk and low-risk PFO patients are analyzed separately, a significant difference in risk of cerebrovascular ischemia recurrence is noted (12.5% versus 4.3% at 3 years of follow-up, P=0.05).
A major issue of the present study is that right-to-left shunting must already be present during normal breathing to identify the PFO as a potential risk factor for cerebral ischemia. Moreover, when this finding is associated with high mobility of the membrane, PFO patients are at a significantly greater risk for further cerebral ischemic events than are those with Valsalva-only shunting or small membrane mobility. This conclusion needs to be taken into account when stratification of cerebrovascular ischemic risk is required in patients with PFO.
When stroke episodes are examined separately from TIAs, PFO patients at high risk present a higher prevalence of recurrence (15% versus 2%) as opposed to those with a low-risk profile. This result did not reach any statistical difference, probably due to the small sample size of the population studied and the relatively low number of recurrent episodes that occurred during the follow-up period. In PFO patients with stroke, several therapeutic options are available, ranging from no treatment through antiaggregants, anticoagulants, and transcatheter closure by device to surgical closure of the patency. However, it is still unclear which is the optimal strategy to adopt. In fact, cerebrovascular ischemic recurrence has been shown to affect patients treated with both antiaggregants and anticoagulants.34 35 Despite the fact that direct PFO closure by surgery or transcatheter device could be considered the optimal strategy in preventing paradoxical embolism, cerebrovascular ischemic recurrence has been documented even in this specific treatment subgroup.36 37 It is important to note that probably the more stringent the criteria chosen for paradoxical embolism and for high-risk PFO grading, the fewer mistakes the clinician will make in selecting the appropriate therapeutic option, particularly concerning patency closure.
Limitations of the Study
This study presents some limitations. To obtain a highly
selected PFO population, we excluded 27 of 101 (27%) patients with
right-to-left shunt. We decided not to consider as eligible those PFO
patients with associated left-to-right shunting, because of anatomic
implications. In fact, this type of communication should be classified
as an interatrial defect, even where no lack of substance is detected
at the fossa ovalis membrane level. Because of its valvelike nature,
PFO does not shunt left to right, but in our series, 11% of patients
were observed to have a bidirectional flow from the PFO conduit.
Further studies are required to fully clarify the anatomic implications
and functional patterns of this finding.
Although our PFO population was presumed to have acute cerebral ischemia as a consequence of paradoxical embolism, no investigations were conducted to rule out the presence of a deep venous thrombosis. The source of emboli is frequently unexpected in a clinical scenario, as well as usually being undetectable by conventional diagnostic tests. In fact, the low sensitivity of the routine or even of more invasive tools has been underlined, even in patients with proven pulmonary embolism.38 Again, recent reports describe primary or secondary (transient or chronic) coagulation abnormalities in PFO patients that could be responsible for paradoxical embolism, even in the absence of deep venous thrombosis.39 Finally, the small sample size of the population studied does not allow us to reach definitive conclusion; however, the overall trend of our results strongly supports our findings on PFO patients at higher risk of recurrence cerebrovascular events. Further prospective, follow-up, multicenter studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis.
Possible Clinical Implications
The significance of PFO detection varies according to the clinical
and pathophysiological scenario. Its recognition in
divers may lead them to refrain from scuba diving, in view of its
documented correlation with paradoxical gas embolism and decompression
sickness.40 41 In other conditions, such as major
pulmonary embolism and severe pulmonary hypertension, a
right-to-left shunt is an independent predictor of adverse outcome,
with a high risk of death and arterial thromboembolic
complications.42
In patients with unexplained stroke or TIA, saline-contrast TEE should be performed to rule out the presence of a cardiac or proximal aortic source of emboli. This study testifies to the usefulness of echocardiographic findings in predicting cerebrovascular ischemia in patients with PFO. In fact, shunting at rest with a high membrane mobility seems to identify those PFO patients at risk for paradoxical brain embolism recurrence. This issue needs to be taken into account for the stratification of risk in a single patient to indicate the correct management and to chose the optimal therapeutic option.
Received February 14, 2000; revision received July 10, 2000; accepted July 10, 2000.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
1. Lechat P, Mas JL, Lascault G, Loron P, Theard M, Klimczac M, Drobinski G, Thomas D, Grosgogeat Y. Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. N Engl J Med.. 1988;318:1148–1152.[Abstract]
2. Di Tullio M, Sacco RL, Gopal A, Mohr JP, Homma S. Patent foramen ovale as a risk factor for cryptogenic stroke. Ann Intern Med.. 1992;117:461–465.
3. de Belder MA, Tourikis L, Leech G, Camm AJ. Risk of patent foramen ovale for thromboembolic events in all age groups. Am J Cardiol.. 1992;69:1316–1320.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Hausmann D, Mügge A, Becht I, Daniel WG. Diagnosis of patent foramen ovale by transesophageal echocardiography and association with cerebral and peripheral embolic events. Am J Cardiol.. 1992;70:668–672.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Cabanes L, Mas JL, Cohen A, Amarenco P, Cabanes PA,
Oubary P, Chedru F, Guérin F, Bousser MG, de Recondo J. Atrial
septal aneurysm and patent foramen ovale as risk factors for
cryptogenic stroke in patients less than 55 years of age: a study using
transesophageal echocardiography.
Stroke.. 1993;24:1865–1873.
6.
Ranoux D, Cohen A, Cabanes L, Amarenco P, Bousser MG,
Mas JL. Patent foramen ovale: is stroke due to paradoxical embolism?
Stroke.. 1993;24:31–34.
7. Jones EF, Calafiore P, Donnan GA, Tonkin AM. Evidence that patent foramen ovale is not a risk factor for cerebral ischemia in the elderly. Am J Cardiol.. 1994;74:596–599.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. O’Brien PJ, Thiemann DR, McNamara RL, Roberts JW, Raska K, Oppenheimer SM, Lima JAC. Usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography in predicting mortality and morbidity in stroke patients without clinically known cardiac sources of embolus. Am J Cardiol.. 1998;81:1144–1151.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Homma S, Di Tullio MR, Sacco RL, Mihalatos D, Li Mandri G, Mohr JP. Characteristics of patent foramen ovale associated with cryptogenic stroke. Stroke.. 1994;25:582–586.[Abstract]
10. Hausmann D, Mügge A, Daniel WG. Identification of patent foramen ovale permitting paradoxic embolism. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1995;26:1030–1038.[Abstract]
11. Millikan CH and the Ad Hoc Committee on Cerebrovascular Disease. A classification and outline of cerebrovascular disease II. Stroke.. 1975;6:565–616.
12.
Levy DE. Transient CNS deficits: a common, benign
syndrome in young adults. Neurology.. 1988;38:831–836.
13.
Amarenco P, Cohen A, Tzourio C, Bertrand B, Hommel M,
Besson G, Chauvel C, Touboul PJ, Bousser MG. Atherosclerotic disease of
the aortic arch and the risk of ischemic stroke. N
Engl J Med.. 1994;331:1474–1479.
14.
Zanette EM, Mancini G, De Castro S, Solaro M, Cartoni
D, Chiarotti F. Patent foramen ovale and transcranial
Doppler: comparison of different procedures. Stroke.. 1996;27:2251–2255.
15. Dixon WJ, ed. BMDP Statistical Software Manual, 1990 Release. Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press; 1990.
16. Hanna JP, Ping Sun J, Furlan AJ, Stewart WJ, Sila CA, Tan M. Patent foramen ovale and brain infarct: echocardiographic predictors, recurrence, and prevention. Stroke.. 1994;25:782–786.[Abstract]
17. Movsowitz C, Podolsky LA, Meyerowitz CB, Jacobs LE, Kotler MN. Patent foramen ovale: a non functional embryological remnant or a potential cause of significant pathology? J Am Soc Echocardiogr.. 1992;5:259–270.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. De Castro S, Cartoni D, Conti G, Beni S. Continuous monitoring by biplane transesophageal echocardiography of pulmonary and paradoxical embolism. J Am Soc Echocardiogr.. 1995;8:217–220.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19.
Di Tullio M, Sacco RL, Venketasubramanian N, Sherman D,
Mohr JP, Homma S. Comparison of diagnostic techniques for
the detection of a patent foramen ovale in stroke patients.
Stroke.. 1993;24:1020–1024.
20.
Steiner MM, Di Tullio MR, Rundek T, Gan R, Chen X,
Liguori C, Brainin M, Homma S, Sacco RL. Patent foramen ovale size and
embolic brain imaging findings among patients with ischemic
stroke. Stroke.. 1998;29:944–948.
21.
Serena J, Segura T, Perez-Ayuso MJ, Bassaganyas J,
Molins A, Davalos A. The need to quantify right-to-left shunt in acute
ischemic stroke. Stroke.. 1998;29:1322–1328.
22. Van Camp G, Schulze D, Cosyns B, Vandenbossche JL. Relation between patent foramen ovale and unexplained stroke. Am J Cardiol.. 1993;71:596–598.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Stone DA, Godard J, Corretti MC, Kittner SJ, Sample C, Price TR, Plotnick GD. Patent foramen ovale: association between the degree of shunt by contrast transesophageal echocardiography and the risk of future ischemic neurologic events. Am Heart J.. 1996;131:158–161.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24. Langholz D, Louie EK, Konstadt SN, Rao TLK, Scanlon PJ. Transesophageal echocardiographic demonstration of distinct mechanisms for right to left shunting across a patent foramen ovale in the absence of pulmonary hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1991;18:1112–1117.[Abstract]
25. Kusumoto FM, Muhiudeen IA, Kuecherer HF, Cahalan MK, Schiller NB. Response of the interatrial septum to transatrial pressure gradients and its potential for predicting pulmonary capillary wedge pressure: an intraoperative study using transesophageal echocardiography in patients during mechanical ventilation. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1993;21:721–728.[Abstract]
26. Strunk BL, Cheitlin MD, Stulbarg MS, Schiller NB. Right-to-left interatrial shunting through a patent foramen ovale despite normal intracardiac pressures. Am J Cardiol.. 1987;60:413–415.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Hanley PC, Jamil Tajik A, Hynes JK, Edwards WD, Reeder GS, Hagler DJ, Seward JB. Diagnosis and classification of atrial septal aneurysm by two-dimensional echocardiography: report of 80 consecutive cases. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1985;6:1370–1382.[Abstract]
28.
Gallet B, Mallergue MC, Adams C. Atrial septal
aneurysm: a potential cause of systemic embolism: an
echocardiographic study. Br Heart J.. 1985;53:292–297.
29. Pearson AC, Nagelhout D, Castello R, Gomez CR, Labovitz AJ. Atrial septal aneurysm and stroke: a transesophageal echocardiographic study. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1991;18:1223–1229.[Abstract]
30. Belkin RN, Kisslo J. Atrial septal aneurysm: recognition and clinical relevance. Am Heart J.. 1990;120:948–957.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31.
Mügge A, Daniel WG, Angermann C, Spes C,
Khandheria BK, Kronzon I, Freedberg RS, Keren A, Dennig K, Engberding
R, Sutherland GR, Vered Z, Erbel R, Visser CA, Lindert O, Hausmann D,
Wenzlaff P. Atrial septal aneurysm in adult patients: a
multicenter study using transthoracic and
transesophageal echocardiography.
Circulation.. 1995;91:2785–2792.
32. Zabalgoitia-Reyes M, Herrera C, Gandhi DK, Mehlman DJ, McPherson DD, Talano JV. A possible mechanism for neurologic ischemic events in patients with atrial septal aneurysm. Am J Cardiol.. 1990;66:761–764.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. Shirani J, Zafari AM, Roberts WC. Morphologic features of fossa ovalis membrane aneurysm in the adult and its clinical significance. J Am Coll Cardiol.. 1995;26:466–471.[Abstract]
34.
Bogousslavsky J, Garazi S, Jeanrenaud X, Aebischer N,
Van Melle G, for the Lausanne Stroke with Paradoxical Embolism Study
Group. Stroke recurrence in patients with patent foramen ovale:
the Lausanne Study. Neurology.. 1996;46:1301–1305.
35. Mas JL, Zuber M, for the French Study Group on Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Aneurysm. Recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with patent foramen ovale, atrial septal aneurysm, or both and cryptogenetic stroke or transient ischemic attach. Am Heart J.. 1995;130:1083–1088.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36.
Bridges ND, Hellenbrand W, Latson L, Filiano J,
Newburger JW, Lock JE. Transcatheter closure of patent
foramen ovale after presumed paradoxical embolism.
Circulation.. 1992;86:1902–1908.
37.
Homma S, Di Tullio MR, Sacco RL, Sciacca RR, Smith C,
Mohr JP. Surgical closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke
patients. Stroke. 1997;28:2376–2381.
38. Rosenow EC, Osmundson PJ, Brown MJ. Pulmonary embolism. Mayo Clin Proc.. 1981;56:161–178.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
39. Chaturvedi S. Coagulation abnormalities in adults with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale. J Neurol Sci.. 1998;160:158–160.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
40. Wilmshurst PT, Byrne JC, Webb-Peploe MM. Relation between interatrial shunts and decompression sickness in divers. Lancet.. 1989;2:1302–1306.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
41. Cartoni D, De Castro S, Valente G, Costanzo C, Beni S, Pelliccia A, Balestra C, Vitali Serdoz L, Fedele F. Identification of scuba divers with patent foramen ovale at risk for decompression sickness. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31(suppl A):515A. Abstract.
42.
Konstantinides S, Geibel A, Kasper W, Olschewski M,
Blumel L, Just H. Patent foramen ovale is an important predictor of
adverse outcome in patients with major pulmonary embolism.
Circulation.. 1998;97:1946–1951.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  L. Galiuto, S. Giubilato, A. R De Caterina, A. Porfidia, C. Colizzi, A. Sestito, I. Porto, C. Trani, A. G Rebuzzi, and F. Crea Patent foramen ovale and hypercoagulable state in the pathogenesis of acute thrombotic myocardial infarction BMJ Case Reports, July 23, 2009; 2009(jul23_1): bcr1120081211 - bcr1120081211. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. A. Almekhlafi, S. B. Wilton, D. M. Rabi, W. A. Ghali, D. L. Lorenzetti, and M. D. Hill Recurrent cerebral ischemia in medically treated patent foramen ovale: A meta-analysis Neurology, July 14, 2009; 73(2): 89 - 97. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. A. Alsheikh-Ali, D. E. Thaler, and D. M. Kent Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke: Incidental or Pathogenic? Stroke, July 1, 2009; 40(7): 2349 - 2355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Asil, N. Steffenhagen, M. Ibrahim, and A. Demchuk Bubble Study in Patients With Massive Right-to-Left Shunt and Recurrent Stroke Stroke, July 1, 2009; 40(7): e505 - e505. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Hur, Y. J. Kim, H.-J. Lee, J.-W. Ha, J. H. Heo, E.-Y. Choi, C.-Y. Shim, T. H. Kim, J. E. Nam, K. O. Choe, et al. Cardiac Computed Tomographic Angiography for Detection of Cardiac Sources of Embolism in Stroke Patients Stroke, June 1, 2009; 40(6): 2073 - 2078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A Wahl and B Meier Patent foramen ovale and ventricular septal defect closure Heart, January 1, 2009; 95(1): 70 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. J. Kim, J. Hur, C.-Y. Shim, H.-J. Lee, J.-W. Ha, K. O. Choe, J. H. Heo, E.-Y. Choi, and B. W. Choi Patent Foramen Ovale: Diagnosis with Multidetector CT--Comparison with Transesophageal Echocardiography Radiology, January 1, 2009; 250(1): 61 - 67. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Serena, J. Marti-Fabregas, E. Santamarina, J. J. Rodriguez, M. J. Perez-Ayuso, J. Masjuan, T. Segura, J. Gallego, A. Davalos, on Behalf of the CODICIA (Right-to-Left Shunt in C, et al. Recurrent Stroke and Massive Right-to-Left Shunt: Results From the Prospective Spanish Multicenter (CODICIA) Study Stroke, December 1, 2008; 39(12): 3131 - 3136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Windecker and B. Meier Patent Foramen Ovale and Cryptogenic Stroke: To Close or Not to Close? Closure: What Else! Circulation, November 4, 2008; 118(19): 1989 - 1997. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Messe and S. E. Kasner Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke: Not to Close Circulation, November 4, 2008; 118(19): 1999 - 2004. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. E. Williamson, J. Kirsch, P. A. Araoz, W. B. Edmister, D. D. Borgeson, J. F. Glockner, and J. F. Breen ECG-Gated Cardiac CT Angiography Using 64-MDCT for Detection of Patent Foramen Ovale Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 929 - 933. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Doufekias, A. Z. Segal, and J. R. Kizer Cardiogenic and aortogenic brain embolism. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 18, 2008; 51(11): 1049 - 1059. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Sarkar, S. Ghosh, S. K. Ghosh, and A. Collier Role of transcranial Doppler ultrasonography in stroke Postgrad. Med. J., November 1, 2007; 83(985): 683 - 689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Sievert, E. Fischer, C. Heinisch, N. Majunke, A. Roemer, and N. Wunderlich Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale Without an Implant: Initial Clinical Experience Circulation, October 9, 2007; 116(15): 1701 - 1706. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 O. I.I. Soliman, M. L. Geleijnse, F. J. Meijboom, A. Nemes, O. Kamp, P. Nihoyannopoulos, N. Masani, S. B. Feinstein, and F. J. Ten Cate The use of contrast echocardiography for the detection of cardiac shunts Eur J Echocardiogr, June 1, 2007; 8(3): s2 - s12. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. C. Johansson, P. Eriksson, Y. Peker, J. Hedner, L. Rastam, and U. Lindblad The influence of patent foramen ovale on oxygen desaturation in obstructive sleep apnoea Eur. Respir. J., January 1, 2007; 29(1): 149 - 155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. H. Bonati, A. Kessel-Schaefer, A. Z. Linka, P. Buser, S. G. Wetzel, E.-W. Radue, P. A. Lyrer, and S. T. Engelter Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Stroke Attributable to Patent Foramen Ovale: Significance of Concomitant Atrial Septum Aneurysm Stroke, August 1, 2006; 37(8): 2030 - 2034. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Marini, M. Miniati, N. Ambrosino, B. Formichi, L. Tonelli, G. Di Ricco, C. Michelassi, S. Giusti, and I. Spadoni Dyspnoea and hypoxaemia after lung surgery: the role of interatrial right-to-left shunt. Eur. Respir. J., July 1, 2006; 28(1): 174 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Sacco, R. Adams, G. Albers, M. J. Alberts, O. Benavente, K. Furie, L. B. Goldstein, P. Gorelick, J. Halperin, R. Harbaugh, et al. Guidelines for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Council on Stroke: Co-Sponsored by the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: The American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline. Circulation, March 14, 2006; 113(10): e409 - e449. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Sacco, R. Adams, G. Albers, M. J. Alberts, O. Benavente, K. Furie, L. B. Goldstein, P. Gorelick, J. Halperin, R. Harbaugh, et al. Guidelines for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Council on Stroke: Co-Sponsored by the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: The American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline. Stroke, February 1, 2006; 37(2): 577 - 617. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Meier Patent Foramen Ovale, Guilty But Only as a Gang Member and for a Lesser Crime J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 17, 2006; 47(2): 446 - 448. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. R. Kizer and R. B. Devereux Clinical practice. Patent foramen ovale in young adults with unexplained stroke. N. Engl. J. Med., December 1, 2005; 353(22): 2361 - 2372. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Schwerzmann, K. Nedeltchev, F. Lagger, H. P. Mattle, S. Windecker, B. Meier, and C. Seiler Prevalence and size of directly detected patent foramen ovale in migraine with aura Neurology, November 8, 2005; 65(9): 1415 - 1418. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Homma and R. L. Sacco Patent Foramen Ovale and Stroke Circulation, August 16, 2005; 112(7): 1063 - 1072. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Meier Closure of patent foramen ovale: technique, pitfalls, complications, and follow up Heart, April 1, 2005; 91(4): 444 - 448. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Wahl, U. Krumsdorf, B. Meier, H. Sievert, S. Ostermayer, K. Billinger, M. Schwerzmann, U. Becker, C. Seiler, M. Arnold, et al. Transcatheter treatment of atrial septal aneurysm associated with patent foramen ovale for prevention of recurrent paradoxical embolism in high-risk patients J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 1, 2005; 45(3): 377 - 380. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G.P. Anzola, E. Morandi, F. Casilli, and E. Onorato Does Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale Really "Shut the Door?": A Prospective Study With Transcranial Doppler Stroke, September 1, 2004; 35(9): 2140 - 2144. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. A. Wu, J. F. Malouf, J. A. Dearani, D. J. Hagler, G. S. Reeder, G. W. Petty, and B. K. Khandheria Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke: Current Understanding and Management Options Arch Intern Med, May 10, 2004; 164(9): 950 - 956. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Messe, I. E. Silverman, J. R. Kizer, S. Homma, C. Zahn, G. Gronseth, and S. E. Kasner Practice Parameter: Recurrent stroke with patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysm: Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology Neurology, April 13, 2004; 62(7): 1042 - 1050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Devuyst, B. Piechowski-Jozwiak, T. Karapanayiotides, J.-W. Fitting, V. Kemeny, L. Hirt, L. A. Urbano, P. Arnold, G. van Melle, P.-A. Despland, et al. Controlled Contrast Transcranial Doppler and Arterial Blood Gas Analysis to Quantify Shunt Through Patent Foramen Ovale Stroke, April 1, 2004; 35(4): 859 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Schwerzmann, S Windecker, A Wahl, H Mehta, K Nedeltchev, H Mattle, C Seiler, and B Meier Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale: impact of device design on safety and efficacy Heart, February 1, 2004; 90(2): 186 - 190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J Landzberg and P. Khairy Indications for the closure of patent foramen ovale Heart, February 1, 2004; 90(2): 219 - 224. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. W. Moore and D. S. Levi Transcatheter closure of atrial shunts: Focus on a lingering issue J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 21, 2004; 43(2): 310 - 312. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. P. Adams Jr Patent Foramen Ovale: Paradoxical Embolism and Paradoxical Data Mayo Clin. Proc., January 1, 2004; 79(1): 15 - 20. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. C. Horton and T. J. Bunch Patent Foramen Ovale and Stroke Mayo Clin. Proc., January 1, 2004; 79(1): 79 - 88. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Khairy, C. P. O'Donnell, and M. J. Landzberg Transcatheter Closure versus Medical Therapy of Patent Foramen Ovale and Presumed Paradoxical Thromboemboli: A Systematic Review Ann Intern Med, November 4, 2003; 139(9): 753 - 760. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. J. Rodriguez, S. Homma, R. L. Sacco, M. R. Di Tullio, R. R. Sciacca, and J.P. Mohr Race-Ethnic Differences in Patent Foramen Ovale, Atrial Septal Aneurysm, and Right Atrial Anatomy Among Ischemic Stroke Patients Stroke, September 1, 2003; 34(9): 2097 - 2102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Meier and J. E. Lock Contemporary Management of Patent Foramen Ovale Circulation, January 7, 2003; 107(1): 5 - 9. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. K. Blersch, B. M. Draganski, S. R. Holmer, H. J. Koch, F. Schlachetzki, U. Bogdahn, and T. Holscher Transcranial Duplex Sonography in the Detection of Patent Foramen Ovale Radiology, December 1, 2002; 225(3): 693 - 699. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Lee, S.-I. Sohn, D.-K. Jung, Y.-W. Cho, J.-G. Lim, S.-D. Yi, S.-R. Lee, C.-H. Sohn, and R. W. Baloh Sudden Deafness and Anterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Infarction Stroke, December 1, 2002; 33(12): 2807 - 2812. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A K Demetriades, K Nedeltchev, M Arnold, H Mattle, S Windecker, and A Wahl Patent foramen ovale, cerebrovascular risk, and complement J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, September 1, 2002; 73(3): 351 - 351. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Homma, R. L. Sacco, M. R. Di Tullio, R. R. Sciacca, J.P. Mohr, and for the PFO in Cryptogenic Stroke Study (PICSS) In Effect of Medical Treatment in Stroke Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale: Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke Study Circulation, June 4, 2002; 105(22): 2625 - 2631. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. B. Horowitz, R. Carrau, D. Crammond, and E. Kanal Risks of Tumor Embolization in the Presence of an Unrecognized Patent Foramen Ovale: Case Report AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., June 1, 2002; 23(6): 982 - 984. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Nedeltchev, M Arnold, A Wahl, M Sturzenegger, E E Vella, S Windecker, B Meier, and H P Mattle Outcome of patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, March 1, 2002; 72(3): 347 - 350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-L. Mas, C. Arquizan, C. Lamy, M. Zuber, L. Cabanes, G. Derumeaux, J. Coste, and the Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Aneurys Recurrent Cerebrovascular Events Associated with Patent Foramen Ovale, Atrial Septal Aneurysm, or Both N. Engl. J. Med., December 13, 2001; 345(24): 1740 - 1746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Rachko, A. M. Safi, D. Yeshou, N. Pillai, L. Salciccioli, and R. A. Stein Cryptogenic Ischemic Stroke and Paradoxical Embolism: Should A Patent Foramen Ovale Be Closed?: Case Report and Literature Review Angiology, November 1, 2001; 52(11): 793 - 799. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||