Adrián Jerónimo, Luis Nombela-Franco, Patricia Simal, Xavier Freixa, Enrico Cerrato, Ignacio Cruz-Gonzalez, Guillermo Dueñas, Gabriela Veiga-Fernandez, Luis Renier Goncalves-Ramirez, Sergio Garcia-Blas, Ana Fernández-Revuelta, Pedro Cepas-Guillén, Francesco Tomassini, Sergio Lopez-Tejero, Rafael Gonzalez-Manzanares, Jose M De la Torre Hernandez, Armando Perez de Prado, Ernesto Valero, Rami Gabani, Alejandro Travieso, Jose Alberto de Agustín, Gabriela Tirado, Pilar Jimenez-Quevedo, Pablo Salinas
{"title":"手术时机对经皮卵圆孔闭合术预防效果的影响。","authors":"Adrián Jerónimo, Luis Nombela-Franco, Patricia Simal, Xavier Freixa, Enrico Cerrato, Ignacio Cruz-Gonzalez, Guillermo Dueñas, Gabriela Veiga-Fernandez, Luis Renier Goncalves-Ramirez, Sergio Garcia-Blas, Ana Fernández-Revuelta, Pedro Cepas-Guillén, Francesco Tomassini, Sergio Lopez-Tejero, Rafael Gonzalez-Manzanares, Jose M De la Torre Hernandez, Armando Perez de Prado, Ernesto Valero, Rami Gabani, Alejandro Travieso, Jose Alberto de Agustín, Gabriela Tirado, Pilar Jimenez-Quevedo, Pablo Salinas","doi":"10.1136/openhrt-2024-002870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The benefit of patent foramen ovale closure (PFOC) ≤9 months after a cryptogenic stroke has been demonstrated in several randomised clinical trials. There is, however, insufficient data to support PFOC in non-recent cryptogenic strokes.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of PFOC in relation to the time since the patient's most recent cryptogenic cerebrovascular event (CVE) or systemic embolism (SE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study with international participation, to assess the results of an early closure (EC, <9 months) for secondary prevention versus a delayed closure (DC, ≥9 months). Recurrence of CVE/SE following PFOC was evaluated as the primary endpoint.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>496 patients were included (65% in the EC and 35% in the DC group). With the exception of a larger defect size in the DC group (tunnel width 6 (4-14) vs 12 (6-16) mm, p=0.005), similar clinical and echocardiographic baseline features were observed between the groups. No differences were observed regarding the type of devices used for PFOC, procedural success rate (99.4 in EC vs 98.8% DC group) and periprocedural complications (2.1% vs 0.8%). Median follow-up was 2.0 (1.2-4.2) years in the whole study population. Recurrence of CVE/SE (3.9% vs 2.6%, p=0.443), death (1.4% vs 1.0%, p=0.697), residual shunt 12 months after PFOC, or antithrombotic treatment strategy were comparable in both groups during follow-up. A subanalysis comparing very delayed PFOC (≥24 months) also showed no differences in recurrence (4.2% in the <24-month vs 3.4% in the ≥24-month group, p=0.770).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients undergoing PFOC before and after 9 months after the index event had a comparable recurrence rate of CVE/SE. These findings suggest that PFOC might be recommended in cryptogenic CVE/SE which are more remote than 9 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":19505,"journal":{"name":"Open Heart","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11481237/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of procedural timing on the preventive yield of percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure.\",\"authors\":\"Adrián Jerónimo, Luis Nombela-Franco, Patricia Simal, Xavier Freixa, Enrico Cerrato, Ignacio Cruz-Gonzalez, Guillermo Dueñas, Gabriela Veiga-Fernandez, Luis Renier Goncalves-Ramirez, Sergio Garcia-Blas, Ana Fernández-Revuelta, Pedro Cepas-Guillén, Francesco Tomassini, Sergio Lopez-Tejero, Rafael Gonzalez-Manzanares, Jose M De la Torre Hernandez, Armando Perez de Prado, Ernesto Valero, Rami Gabani, Alejandro Travieso, Jose Alberto de Agustín, Gabriela Tirado, Pilar Jimenez-Quevedo, Pablo Salinas\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/openhrt-2024-002870\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The benefit of patent foramen ovale closure (PFOC) ≤9 months after a cryptogenic stroke has been demonstrated in several randomised clinical trials. There is, however, insufficient data to support PFOC in non-recent cryptogenic strokes.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of PFOC in relation to the time since the patient's most recent cryptogenic cerebrovascular event (CVE) or systemic embolism (SE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study with international participation, to assess the results of an early closure (EC, <9 months) for secondary prevention versus a delayed closure (DC, ≥9 months). Recurrence of CVE/SE following PFOC was evaluated as the primary endpoint.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>496 patients were included (65% in the EC and 35% in the DC group). With the exception of a larger defect size in the DC group (tunnel width 6 (4-14) vs 12 (6-16) mm, p=0.005), similar clinical and echocardiographic baseline features were observed between the groups. No differences were observed regarding the type of devices used for PFOC, procedural success rate (99.4 in EC vs 98.8% DC group) and periprocedural complications (2.1% vs 0.8%). Median follow-up was 2.0 (1.2-4.2) years in the whole study population. Recurrence of CVE/SE (3.9% vs 2.6%, p=0.443), death (1.4% vs 1.0%, p=0.697), residual shunt 12 months after PFOC, or antithrombotic treatment strategy were comparable in both groups during follow-up. A subanalysis comparing very delayed PFOC (≥24 months) also showed no differences in recurrence (4.2% in the <24-month vs 3.4% in the ≥24-month group, p=0.770).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients undergoing PFOC before and after 9 months after the index event had a comparable recurrence rate of CVE/SE. These findings suggest that PFOC might be recommended in cryptogenic CVE/SE which are more remote than 9 months.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Heart\",\"volume\":\"11 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11481237/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-002870\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Heart","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-002870","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:多项随机临床试验证实,隐源性脑卒中发生后≤9 个月时进行卵圆孔闭合术(PFOC)是有益的。目的:本研究旨在评估 PFOC 的有效性与患者最近一次隐源性脑血管事件(CVE)或全身性栓塞(SE)发生时间的关系:我们开展了一项有国际参与的多中心回顾性队列研究,以评估早期闭合(EC)的效果:研究共纳入了 496 名患者(65% 属于 EC 组,35% 属于 DC 组)。除直流组缺损面积较大(隧道宽度 6 (4-14) mm vs 12 (6-16) mm,P=0.005)外,两组患者的临床和超声心动图基线特征相似。PFOC所用设备的类型、手术成功率(EC组99.4% vs DC组98.8%)和围手术期并发症(2.1% vs 0.8%)均无差异。整个研究人群的中位随访时间为 2.0(1.2-4.2)年。两组随访期间的 CVE/SE 复发率(3.9% vs 2.6%,P=0.443)、死亡率(1.4% vs 1.0%,P=0.697)、PFOC 12 个月后的残余分流率或抗血栓治疗策略相当。一项比较极度延迟的 PFOC(≥24 个月)的子分析也显示,两组的复发率没有差异(结论:PFOC 术后复发率为 4.2%):在指数事件发生后 9 个月之前和之后接受 PFOC 的患者的 CVE/SE 复发率相当。这些研究结果表明,对于时间超过9个月的隐源性CVE/SE,可推荐使用PFOC。
Influence of procedural timing on the preventive yield of percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure.
Background: The benefit of patent foramen ovale closure (PFOC) ≤9 months after a cryptogenic stroke has been demonstrated in several randomised clinical trials. There is, however, insufficient data to support PFOC in non-recent cryptogenic strokes.
Aims: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of PFOC in relation to the time since the patient's most recent cryptogenic cerebrovascular event (CVE) or systemic embolism (SE).
Methods: We conducted a multicentre, retrospective cohort study with international participation, to assess the results of an early closure (EC, <9 months) for secondary prevention versus a delayed closure (DC, ≥9 months). Recurrence of CVE/SE following PFOC was evaluated as the primary endpoint.
Results: 496 patients were included (65% in the EC and 35% in the DC group). With the exception of a larger defect size in the DC group (tunnel width 6 (4-14) vs 12 (6-16) mm, p=0.005), similar clinical and echocardiographic baseline features were observed between the groups. No differences were observed regarding the type of devices used for PFOC, procedural success rate (99.4 in EC vs 98.8% DC group) and periprocedural complications (2.1% vs 0.8%). Median follow-up was 2.0 (1.2-4.2) years in the whole study population. Recurrence of CVE/SE (3.9% vs 2.6%, p=0.443), death (1.4% vs 1.0%, p=0.697), residual shunt 12 months after PFOC, or antithrombotic treatment strategy were comparable in both groups during follow-up. A subanalysis comparing very delayed PFOC (≥24 months) also showed no differences in recurrence (4.2% in the <24-month vs 3.4% in the ≥24-month group, p=0.770).
Conclusion: Patients undergoing PFOC before and after 9 months after the index event had a comparable recurrence rate of CVE/SE. These findings suggest that PFOC might be recommended in cryptogenic CVE/SE which are more remote than 9 months.
期刊介绍:
Open Heart is an online-only, open access cardiology journal that aims to be “open” in many ways: open access (free access for all readers), open peer review (unblinded peer review) and open data (data sharing is encouraged). The goal is to ensure maximum transparency and maximum impact on research progress and patient care. The journal is dedicated to publishing high quality, peer reviewed medical research in all disciplines and therapeutic areas of cardiovascular medicine. Research is published across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Opinionated discussions on controversial topics are welcomed. Open Heart aims to operate a fast submission and review process with continuous publication online, to ensure timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal adheres to a rigorous and transparent peer review process, and all articles go through a statistical assessment to ensure robustness of the analyses. Open Heart is an official journal of the British Cardiovascular Society.