Preview Mode Links will not work in preview mode

BrainWaves


Sep 14, 2017

Last year, the management of PFO was 'open' for discussion. Now, consider the case closed. Recent data indicates PFOs should be closed in certain patients with cryptogenic strokes. But some questions remain unanswered. This week's episode is an update from last year's review on this frequent topic that troubles stroke units.

 

Produced by James E. Siegler & Chris Favilla. Music by Lee Rosevere and Marcos H. Bolanos. Voiceover by Erika Mejia. BrainWaves' podcasts and online content are intended for medical education purposes only. Jim is not a cardiac surgeon. Just a guy who's trying to bring you all the latest updates for what smarter doctors are doing.

REFERENCES

  1. Kent DM, Ruthazer R, Weimar C, Mas JL, Serena J, Homma S, Di Angelantonio E, Di Tullio MR, Lutz JS, Elkind MS, Griffith J, Jaigobin C, Mattle HP, Michel P, Mono ML, Nedeltchev K, Papetti F and Thaler DE. An index to identify stroke-related vs incidental patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke. Neurology. 2013;81:619-25.
  2. Meier B and Lock JE. Contemporary management of patent foramen ovale. Circulation. 2003;107:5-9.
  3. Kent DM, Dahabreh IJ, Ruthazer R, Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Carroll JD, Saver JL, Smalling RW, Juni P, Mattle HP, Meier B and Thaler DE. Device Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale After Stroke: Pooled Analysis of Completed Randomized Trials. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2016;67:907-17.