Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Patent Foramen Ovale Treatment & Management

  • Author: Sandy N Shah, DO, MBA, FACC, FACP, FACOI; Chief Editor: Park W Willis IV, MD  more...
 
Updated: Dec 06, 2015
 

Medical Care

Most patients with a patent foramen ovale (PFO) as an isolated finding receive no special treatment. No consensus exists on treatment of PFO in patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke.

When PFO is associated with an otherwise unexplained neurologic event,[9] traditional treatment has been antiplatelet (ie, aspirin) therapy alone in low-risk patients or combined with warfarin in high-risk individuals to prevent cryptogenic stroke. With administration of warfarin, the international normalized ratio (INR) is maintained at 2-3. Consultation with a neurologist is mandatory to direct this treatment.

The recurrence rate of stroke or TIA has been reported to be as high as 3.4-3.9% per year.

In patients with atrial septal aneurysm and PFO, the risk of first recurrent stroke within 2 years has been reported to be as high as 9%, whereas the rate of subsequent stroke or TIA recurrence within 2 years increases to 22%.

In a study that evaluated the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel and aspirin in 140 patients who underwent interventional PFO/atrial septal defect (ASD) closure, Polzin et al reported a 71% incidence of high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to clopidogrel but only a 4% HTPR for aspirin.[17] Of the 12 complications noted, 9 were bleeding events (including 3 major bleeding events) and the remaining 3 were TIAs. The investigators noted that despite the high incidence of HTPR to clopidogrel in this patient population, there were no reports of stroke or thrombus formation on the occluder.[17]

 

Next

Surgical Care

Surgical closure

Surgical closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) with double continuous suture has resulted in elimination of residual shunt across the PFO.

Indications include the following:

  • PFO more than 25 mm in size
  • Inadequate rim of tissue around the defect
  • Percutaneous device failure

Advantages include the following:

  • Permanent closure of the defect
  • Prevents future paradoxical emboli
  • No long-term anticoagulation and its risks

Disadvantages include the following:

  • Open-heart surgery
  • Hospital stay for a few days
  • The usual risks of cardiac surgery

Percutaneous care

Percutaneous closure of PFO during cardiac catheterization is an emerging therapeutic option.

Indications

  • Recurrent cryptogenic stroke due to presumed paradoxical embolism through PFO failure of conventional drug therapy
  • Contraindications to anticoagulant treatment
  • Alternative to medical therapy or surgical closure - Cryptogenic transient ischemic attack (TIA) due to presumed paradoxical embolism through a PFO
  • Presumed paradoxical peripheral or coronary embolism through PFO
  • Cryptogenic stroke, TIA, or peripheral or coronary embolism due to presumed paradoxical embolism through a PFO that is associated with hypercoagulability state, [18] such as (1) divers with a PFO who are at risk of clinical events that are related to paradoxical embolism through a PFO during decompression, (2) those with systemic deoxygenation due to right-to-left shunting through a PFO in the absence of severe pulmonary hypertension (eg, platypnea orthodeoxia, right ventricular infarction), (3) those with migraine headache accompanied by aura, and (4) those with posttraumatic fat embolism syndrome with cerebral embolism by way of PFO.

Long-term follow-up (40.2 ± 11.0 y) in 301 patients who underwent percutaneous PFO closure following cryptogenic stroke or TIA demonstrated the procedure to be safe and effective, with a low incidence of procedural complications and recurrent neurovascular events.[18]

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 2 percutaneous devices for PFO closure. The CardioSEAL Septal Occlusion System is a double umbrella-shaped permanent implant. It is made up of metal framework to which polyester fabric is attached. The CardioSEAL implant is available in sizes 17 mm, 23 mm, 28 mm, and 33 mm.

The Amplatzer PFO Occluder is a self-expanding wire mesh with double discs. It contains inner polyester fabric patches that, along with the wire mesh, cause the formation and accumulation of a blood clot, which seals the opening. After the device is in place, tissue will grow over it, and the device then becomes a part of the atrial septum.

The procedure requires a hospital stay of 24-48 hours and prophylactic aspirin or warfarin for 6 months following the procedure. After more than 5 years of follow-up observation, the results are promising.

Although hypertrophy and lipomatosis of the interatrial septum have been considered contraindications for transcatheter PFO closures, a study by Rigatelli et al suggests that this is not always the case.[19] The authors investigated outcomes in 10 patients with PFO who, owing to multiple recurrent stroke events (9 patients) or to the need for a posterior cerebral operation (1 patient), underwent transcatheter PFO closure, despite the presence of hypertrophy or lipomatosis of the rim of the fossa ovalis.

Following intracardiac echocardiography assessment and measurements, a 25-mm Amplatzer device was implanted in 2 patients in the Rigatelli study, and a 25-mm Premere Occlusion System device was implanted in 8 patients. On mean follow-up (36.6 months), 2 patients were found to have a small residual shunt. During this period, however, none of the patients experienced stroke recurrence, aortic erosion, or device thrombosis. The investigators concluded that in patients with hypertrophy or lipomatosis of the fossa ovalis rim, safe and effective PFO closure may be attainable, at least in the absence of severe atrial septal aneurysm, if rim thickness is carefully evaluated with intracardiac echocardiography, and if soft and asymmetrical opening devices are used.

Previous
Next

Complications

Complications of catheter-based closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO), such as embolism of device, device entrapment within the Chiari network, frame fracture, vessel damage, or perforation of atrial wall, may require further surgery. Other possible complications include air embolism during device delivery, thrombus formation around the device, and infective endocarditis.

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Sandy N Shah, DO, MBA, FACC, FACP, FACOI Cardiologist

Sandy N Shah, DO, MBA, FACC, FACP, FACOI is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Cardiology, American College of Osteopathic Internists, American College of Physicians, American Osteopathic Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, American Medical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Marschall S Runge, MD, PhD Charles and Anne Sanders Distinguished Professor of Medicine, Chairman, Department of Medicine, Vice Dean for Clinical Affairs, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine

Marschall S Runge, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Physiological Society, American Society for Clinical Investigation, American Society for Investigative Pathology, Association of American Physicians, Texas Medical Association, Southern Society for Clinical Investigation, American Federation for Clinical Research, Association of Professors of Medicine, Association of Professors of Cardiology, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American College of Cardiology, American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine, American Federation for Medical Research, American Heart Association

Disclosure: Received honoraria from Pfizer for speaking and teaching; Received honoraria from Merck for speaking and teaching; Received consulting fee from Orthoclinica Diagnostica for consulting.

Chief Editor

Park W Willis IV, MD Sarah Graham Distinguished Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine

Park W Willis IV, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Echocardiography

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Park W Willis IV, MD Sarah Graham Distinguished Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine

Park W Willis IV, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Echocardiography

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

The authors and editors of Medscape Reference gratefully acknowledge the contributions of previous coauthors Ahmed Alghamdi, MD, MB, BCh, FRCP(C) and Dawn M Calderon, DO to the development and writing of this article.

References
  1. Agostoni P, Gasparini G, Destro G. Acute myocardial infarction probably caused by paradoxical embolus in a pregnant woman. Heart. 2004 Mar. 90(3):e12. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  2. Diaz Castro O, Bueno H, Nebreda LA. Acute myocardial infarction caused by paradoxical tumorous embolism as a manifestation of hepatocarcinoma. Heart. 2004 May. 90(5):e29. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  3. Carey HB, Boltax R, Dickey KW, Finkelstein FO. Bilateral renal infarction secondary to paradoxical embolism. Am J Kidney Dis. 1999 Oct. 34(4):752-5. [Medline].

  4. Pell AC, Hughes D, Keating J, Christie J, Busuttil A, Sutherland GR. Brief report: fulminating fat embolism syndrome caused by paradoxical embolism through a patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 1993 Sep 23. 329(13):926-9. [Medline].

  5. Pellikka PA, Tajik AJ, Khandheria BK, et al. Carcinoid heart disease. Clinical and echocardiographic spectrum in 74 patients. Circulation. 1993 Apr. 87(4):1188-96. [Medline].

  6. Shanks M, Manawadu D, Vonder Muhll I, Khan K, Becher H, Choy J. Detection of Patent Foramen Ovale by 3D Echocardiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Mar. 5(3):329-31. [Medline].

  7. Kerr AJ, Buck T, Chia K, Chow CM, Fox E, Levine RA, et al. Transmitral Doppler: a new transthoracic contrast method for patent foramen ovale detection and quantification. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000 Nov 15. 36(6):1959-66. [Medline].

  8. 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 Jul. 24(7):1020-4. [Medline].

  9. Steenblik MH, Mineau GP, Pimentel R, et al. Population-based assessment of familial inheritance and neurologic comorbidities among patients with an isolated atrial septal defect. Congenit Heart Dis. 2009 Nov. 4(6):459-63. [Medline].

  10. Hagen PT, Scholz DG, Edwards WD. Incidence and size of patent foramen ovale during the first 10 decades of life: an autopsy study of 965 normal hearts. Mayo Clin Proc. 1984 Jan. 59(1):17-20. [Medline].

  11. Bonati LH, Wetzel SG, Kessel-Schaefer A, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging findings differ between stroke attributable to spontaneous cervical artery dissection and patent foramen ovale. Eur J Neurol. 2009 Oct 23. [Medline].

  12. Schneider B, Hofmann T, Justen MH, Meinertz T. Chiari's network: normal anatomic variant or risk factor for arterial embolic events?. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Jul. 26(1):203-10. [Medline].

  13. Khositseth A, Cabalka AK, Sweeney JP, Fortuin FD, Reeder GS, Connolly HM, et al. Transcatheter Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale in patients with presumed paradoxical embolism. Mayo Clin Proc. 2004 Jan. 79(1):35-41. [Medline].

  14. Attenhofer Jost CH, Connolly HM, O'Leary PW, Warnes CA, Tajik AJ, Seward JB. Left heart lesions in patients with Ebstein anomaly. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005 Mar. 80(3):361-8. [Medline].

  15. Sloan MA, Alexandrov AV, Tegeler CH, et al. Assessment: transcranial Doppler ultrasonography: report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2004 May 11. 62(9):1468-81. [Medline].

  16. Thaler DE, Ruthazer R, Di Angelantonio E, Di Tullio MR, Donovan JS, Elkind MS, et al. Neuroimaging findings in cryptogenic stroke patients with and without patent foramen ovale. Stroke. 2013 Mar. 44(3):675-80. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  17. Polzin A, Dannenberg L, Popp VS, Kelm M, Zeus T. Antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel and aspirin after interventional patent foramen ovale/ atrium septum defect closure. Platelets. 2015 Nov 10. 1-5. [Medline].

  18. Mirzaali M, Dooley M, Wynne D, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure following cryptogenic stroke or transient ischaemic attack: Long-term follow-up of 301 cases. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Nov 15. 86 (6):1078-84. [Medline].

  19. Rigatelli G, Dell'avvocata F, Giordan M, et al. Transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure in spite of interatrial septum hypertrophy or lipomatosis: a case series. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2009 Oct 13. [Medline].

  20. Maffe S, Dellavesa P, Zenone F, et al. Transthoracic second harmonic two- and three-dimensional echocardiography for detection of patent foramen ovale. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2009 Nov 12. [Medline].

  21. Adams HP. Patent foramen ovale: paradoxical embolism and paradoxical data. Mayo Clin Proc. 2004 Jan. 79(1):15-20. [Medline].

  22. Aslam F, Shirani J, Haque AA. Patent foramen ovale: assessment, clinical significance and therapeutic options. South Med J. 2006 Dec. 99(12):1367-72. [Medline].

  23. Bogousslavsky J, Garazi S, Jeanrenaud X, et al. Stroke recurrence in patients with patent foramen ovale: the Lausanne Study. Lausanne Stroke with Paradoxal Embolism Study Group. Neurology. 1996 May. 46(5):1301-5. [Medline].

  24. Bridges ND, Hellenbrand W, Latson L, et al. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale after presumed paradoxical embolism. Circulation. 1992 Dec. 86(6):1902-8. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  25. Cheng TO. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale: a definitive treatment for platypnea-orthodeoxia. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000 Sep. 51(1):120. [Medline].

  26. Cujec B, Mainra R, Johnson DH. Prevention of recurrent cerebral ischemic events in patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic strokes or transient ischemic attacks. Can J Cardiol. 1999 Jan. 15(1):57-64. [Medline].

  27. Danzi GB, Sesana M, Capuano C, Baglini R. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale: pathophysiology, indications, and technique. Neurol Sci. 2003 May. 24 Suppl 1:S17-9. [Medline].

  28. Devuyst G, Bogousslavsky J, Ruchat P, et al. Prognosis after stroke followed by surgical closure of patent foramen ovale: a prospective follow-up study with brain MRI and simultaneous transesophageal and transcranial Doppler ultrasound. Neurology. 1996 Nov. 47(5):1162-6. [Medline].

  29. Donnan GA, Davis SM. Patent foramen ovale and stroke: closure by further randomized trial is required!. Stroke. 2004 Mar. 35(3):806. [Medline].

  30. Dubourg O, Bourdarias JP, Farcot JC, et al. Contrast echocardiographic visualization of cough-induced right to left shunt through a patent foramen ovale. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984 Sep. 4(3):587-94. [Medline].

  31. Fransson SG. The Botallo mystery. Clin Cardiol. 1999 Jun. 22(6):434-6. [Medline].

  32. Furlan AJ. Patent foramen ovale and recurrent stroke: closure is the best option: yes. Stroke. 2004 Mar. 35(3):803-4. [Medline].

  33. Guffi M, Bogousslavsky J, Jeanrenaud X, et al. Surgical prophylaxis of recurrent stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale: a pilot study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1996 Aug. 112(2):260-3. [Medline].

  34. Hara H, Virmani R, Ladich E, Mackey-Bojack S, Titus J, Reisman M. Patent foramen ovale: current pathology, pathophysiology, and clinical status. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Nov 1. 46(9):1768-76. [Medline].

  35. Hausmann D, Mugge A, Daniel WG. Identification of patent foramen ovale permitting paradoxic embolism. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Oct. 26(4):1030-8. [Medline].

  36. Homma S, Sacco RL, Di Tullio MR, et al. Effect of medical treatment in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale: patent foramen ovale in Cryptogenic Stroke Study. Circulation. 2002 Jun 4. 105(22):2625-31. [Medline].

  37. Jeffrey S. TCD Bests TEE for Diagnosis of PFO. Medscape [serial online]. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/820702. Accessed: February 25, 2014.

  38. Kerut EK, Norfleet WT, Plotnick GD, Giles TD. Patent foramen ovale: a review of associated conditions and the impact of physiological size. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Sep. 38(3):613-23. [Medline].

  39. Khairy P, O'Donnell CP, Landzberg MJ. Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and presumed paradoxical thromboemboli: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Nov 4. 139(9):753-60. [Medline].

  40. Kizer JR, Devereux RB. Clinical practice. Patent foramen ovale in young adults with unexplained stroke. N Engl J Med. 2005 Dec 1. 353(22):2361-72. [Medline].

  41. Landzberg MJ, Khairy P. Indications for the closure of patent foramen ovale. Heart. 2004 Feb. 90(2):219-24. [Medline].

  42. Lechat P, Mas JL, Lascault G, et al. Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. N Engl J Med. 1988 May 5. 318(18):1148-52. [Medline].

  43. Lock JE. Patent foramen ovale is indicted, but the case hasn't gone to trial. Circulation. 2000 Feb 29. 101(8):838. [Medline].

  44. Marie Valente A, Rhodes JF. Current indications and contraindications for transcatheter atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale device closure. Am Heart J. 2007 Apr. 153(4 Suppl):81-4. [Medline].

  45. Mas JL, Zuber M. Recurrent cerebrovascular events in patients with patent foramen ovale, atrial septal aneurysm, or both and cryptogenic stroke or transient ischemic attack. French Study Group on Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Aneurysm. Am Heart J. 1995 Nov. 130(5):1083-8. [Medline].

  46. Meier B, Lock JE. Contemporary management of patent foramen ovale. Circulation. 2003 Jan 7. 107(1):5-9. [Medline].

  47. Meissner I, Whisnant JP, Khandheria BK, Spittell PC, O'Fallon WM, Pascoe RD, et al. Prevalence of potential risk factors for stroke assessed by transesophageal echocardiography and carotid ultrasonography: the SPARC study. Stroke Prevention: Assessment of Risk in a Community. Mayo Clin Proc. 1999 Sep. 74(9):862-9. [Medline].

  48. Mohrs OK, Petersen SE, Erkapic D, et al. Diagnosis of patent foramen ovale using contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Jan. 184(1):234-40. [Medline].

  49. Ranoux D, Cohen A, Cabanes L, et al. Patent foramen ovale: is stroke due to paradoxical embolism?. Stroke. 1993 Jan. 24(1):31-4. [Medline].

  50. Ruchat P, Bogousslavsky J, Hurni M, et al. Systematic surgical closure of patent foramen ovale in selected patients with cerebrovascular events due to paradoxical embolism. Early results of a preliminary study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997 May. 11(5):824-7. [Medline].

  51. Sievert H, Babic UU, Hausdorf G, et al. Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale with ASDOS device (a multi-institutional European trial). Am J Cardiol. 1998 Dec 1. 82(11):1405-13. [Medline].

  52. Sievert H, Taaffe M. Patent foramen ovale: the jury is still out. Eur Heart J. 2004 Mar. 25(5):361-2. [Medline].

  53. Siostrzonek P, Zangeneh M, Gossinger H, et al. Comparison of transesophageal and transthoracic contrast echocardiography for detection of a patent foramen ovale. Am J Cardiol. 1991 Nov 1. 68(11):1247-9. [Medline].

  54. Slavin L, Tobis JM, Rangarajan K, Dao C, Krivokapich J, Liebeskind DS. Five-year experience with percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale. Am J Cardiol. 2007 May 1. 99(9):1316-20. [Medline].

  55. Somberg J. Patent foramen ovale closure devices: thoughts from the circulatory device advisory panel. Am J Cardiol. 2007 Sep 1. 100(5):905-6. [Medline].

  56. Stone DA, Godard J, Corretti MC, et al. 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 Jan. 131(1):158-61. [Medline].

  57. Windecker S, Wahl A, Chatterjee T, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with paradoxical embolism: long-term risk of recurrent thromboembolic events. Circulation. 2000 Feb 29. 101(8):893-8. [Medline].

  58. Rimoldi SF, Ott S, Rexhaj E, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure in obstructive sleep apnea improves blood pressure and cardiovascular function. Hypertension. 2015 Nov. 66 (5):1050-7. [Medline].

  59. Pedersen TA, Larsen SH, Nielsen-Kudsk JE. Closure of a patent foramen ovale in patients with platypnoea-orthodeoxia: A rare and overlooked cause of dyspnoea and hypoxaemia. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2015 Dec. 49 (6):357-60. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
This 2-dimensional echocardiogram in an infant (subcostal long-axis view) shows a patent foramen ovale. Right atrium (RA) and left atrium (LA
Color Doppler of the patent foramen ovale (PFO) seen in the previous image. A small amount of left-to-right flow is present. This left-to-right flow pattern is typical for PFO seen in newborn infants
Color Doppler of the patent foramen ovale (PFO) seen in the previous image. A small amount of left-to-right flow is present. This left-to-right flow pattern is typical for PFO seen in newborn infants
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.