Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 9, 2026

Closure of a Patent Foramen Ovale PFO: An Intervention Sequence
Published on: December 23, 2022
Percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure for secondary stroke prevention: Network meta-analysis
Georgios Tsivgoulis1, Aristeidis H Katsanos2, Dimitris Mavridis2
1From the Second Department of Neurology (G.T., A.H.K., L.P., A. Filippatou) and Second Department of Cardiology (A. Frogoudaki, A.-R.V., I.I., J.P., S.D.), Attikon University Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece; Department of Neurology (G.T., A.W.A., A.V.A.), University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis; Departments of Neurology (A.H.K.) and Hygiene and Epidemiology (D.M.), School of Medicine, and Department of Primary Education (D.M.), University of Ioannina; Second Department of Neurology (T.K.), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA University Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece; Department of Neurology (F.P.), University Hospital of Geneva, Switzerland; Department of Neurology (G.H.), University of Thessaly, Larissa; and Department of Neurology (P.D.M.), School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece. tsivgoulisgiorg@yahoo.gr.
Objective:
Current guidelines report no benefit for patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure compared to medical treatment in patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke (IS) or TIA. Two recent randomized controlled clinical trials have challenged these recommendations.
Methods:
We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to estimate the safety and efficacy of closure compared to medical treatment, and to compare available devices. We conducted pairwise meta-analyses for closure vs medical therapy, irrespective of the device used, and for each device vs medical therapy.
Results:
Our literature search highlighted 6 studies. PFO occlusion was associated with reduced risk of recurrent IS (risk ratio [RR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.91) and IS/TIA (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.88) but with increased risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) (RR 4.59, 95% CI 2.01-10.45) compared to medical treatment. In indirect analyses, both Amplatzer (AMP) and GORE devices were found to be associated with a lower risk of new-onset AF compared to STARFlex (SFX) (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10-0.65 and RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.95). Moreover, AMP was found to be associated with a lower risk of recurrent IS/TIA events compared to the SFX device (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14-0.91). In the clustered ranking plot on the risk of IS against new-onset AF, GORE was comparable to AMP; however, on the risk of IS/TIA against new-onset AF, AMP appeared to be superior to the GORE device. In both ranking plots, SFX was highlighted as the worst option.
Conclusion:
PFO closure is associated with reduced risk of recurrent IS or IS/TIA and with increased risk of new-onset AF.
Related Concept Videos
Secondary Active Transport
Protein Networks
These interactions can be represented through maps depicting protein-protein interaction networks, represented as nodes and edges. Nodes are circles that are representative of a protein,...
Secondary Healthcare System
Directing Effect of Substituents: meta-Directing Groups
Primary and Secondary Growth in Roots and Shoots
Network Covalent Solids
To break or to melt a covalent network solid, covalent bonds must be broken. Because covalent bonds are relatively strong, covalent network solids are typically...

