Verschluss des persistierenden Foramen ovale nach ischämischem Schlaganfall

Abstract

Secondary prevention of otherwise cryptogenic stroke in patients with patent foramen ovale (PFO) has been a matter of debate over nearly three decades. Main issues were that data essentially derived from case-control-studies for a long period and that results from the randomized controlled trials CLOSURE-I, PC Trial and RESPECT, which were published in 2012 and 2013, were interpreted in different ways. The likewise not blinded randomized controlled trials REDUCE, CLOSE and DEFENSE-PFO, which were published in 2017 and 2018, consistently demonstrated superiority of interventional PFO closure compared to secondary stroke prevention with antiplatelet therapy in patients 18 to 60 years with cryptogenic stroke and moderate to severe atrial right-to-left shunt. Consecutively, the German Society of Cardiology, the German Society of Neurology and the German Stroke Society published joint recommendations strongly recommending interventional PFO closure in these patients. This review article briefly summarizes current scientific knowledge. Furthermore, open questions regarding secondary prevention in otherwise cryptogenic stroke patients with PFO are discussed.

Die optimale Sekundärprävention des ischämischen Schlaganfalls bei Patienten mit persistierendem Foramen ovale (PFO) wird seit etwa 30 Jahren kontrovers diskutiert: Katheter-basierter Verschluss des PFO plus Thrombozytenaggregationshemmung oder nur Thrombozytenaggregationshemmung oder orale Antikoagulation mittels eines Vitamin-K-Antagonisten? Die vorliegende Übersicht erörtert neben einer kurzen Darstellung der Datenlage offene Fragen der aktuellen Diskussion.

Schlüsselwörter

Schlaganfall - TIA - orale Antikoagulation - Thrombozytenaggregationshemmung - atrialer Shunt

Key words

stroke - TIA - oral anticoagulation - antiplatelet therapy - atrial shunt

• Literatur

• 1 Diener HC, Grau A, Baldus S. et al. Kryptogener Schlaganfall und offenes Foramen ovale, S2e-Leitlinie. Der Nervenarzt 2018; 89: 1143-1153 . doi:10.1007/s00115-018-0609-y
• 2 Röther J, Köhrmann M, Steiner T. et al. PFO-Verschluss bei kryptogenem Schlaganfall – „sollte erwogen werden“. Der Nervenarzt 2018; 89: 1154-1155 . doi:10.1007/s00115-018-0613-2
• 3 Köhrmann M, Schellinger PD, Tsivgoulis G. et al. Patent Foramen Ovale: Story Closed?. Journal of Stroke 2019; 21: 23-30 . doi:10.5853/jos.2018.03097
• 4 Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J. et al. Closure or Medical Therapy für Cryptogenic Stroke with Patent Foramen Ovale. N Engl J Med 2012; 366: 991-999 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1009639
• 5 Meier B, Kalesan B, Mattle HP. et al. Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale on Cryptogenic Embolism. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1083-1091 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1211716
• 6 Carroll JD, Saver JL, Thaler DE. et al. Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale versus Medical Therapy after Cryptogenic Stroke. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1092-1100 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoal1301440
• 7 Saver JL, Carroll JD, Thaler DE. et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Medical Therapy after Stroke. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1022-1032 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoal1610057
• 8 Søndergaard L, Kasner SE, Rhodes JF. et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1033-1042 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoal1707404
• 9 Mas JL, Derumeaux G, Guillon B. et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1011-1021 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoal1705915
• 10 Lee PH, Song JK, Kim JS. et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale: The DEFENSE-PFO Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 71: 2335-2342 . doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.046
• 11 Société Française Neuro-Vasculaire, Société Française de Cardiologie. Infarctus cerebral et foramen ovale permeable (21.02.2019). Im Internet: https://www.societe-francaise-neurovasculaire.fr/preconisations-sfnv
• 12 Wein T, Lindsay MP, Côté R. et al. Canadian stroke best practice recommendations: Secondary prevention of stroke, sixth edition practice guidelines, update 2017. International Journal of Stroke 2018; 13: 420-443 . doi:10.1177/1747493017743062
• 13 Thaler DE. Patient Selection for PFO Closure Based on the RoPE Study. Cardiac Interventions Today, March/April 2014. Im Internet: https://citoday.com/pdfs/cit0314_F5_Thaler.pdf
• 14 Kent DM, Ruthazer R, Weimar C. et al. An index to identify stroke-related vs incidental patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke. Neurology 2013; 81: 619-625 . doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182a08d59
• 15 Mir H, Siemieniuk RAC, Ge LC. et al. Patent foramen ovale closure, antipatelent therapy or anticoagulation in patients with patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis incorporating complementary external evidence. BMJ Open 2018; 8: e023761 . doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023761
• 16 Turc G, Calvet D, Guerin P. et al. Closure, Anticoagulation, or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke with Patient Foramen Ovale: Systematic Review of Randomized Trials, Sequential Meta-Analysis, and New Insights from the CLOSE Study. J Am Heart Assoc 2018; 7: e008356 . doi:10.1161/JAHA.117.008356
• 17 Dawson A, Mullen MJ, Peatfield R. et al. Migraine Intervention with STARFlex Technology (MIST) Trial: A Prospective, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure with STARFlex Septal Repair Implant to Resolve Refractory Migraine Headache. Circulation 2008; 117: 1397-1404 . doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.727271
• 18 Pristipino C, Sievert H, D'Ascenzo F. et al. European position paper on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale. General approach and left circulation thromboembolism. Eurointervention 2019; 14: 1389-1402 . doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00622
• 19 Prasad K, Siemieniuk R, Hao Q. et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel for acute high risk transient ischaemic attack and minor ischaemic stroke: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ 2018; 363: k5130 . doi:10.1136/bmj.k5130
• 20 Kasner SE, Swaminathan B, Lavados P. NAVIGATE ESUS Investigators. et al. Rivaroxaban or aspirin for patent foramen ovale and embolic stroke of undetermined source: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the NAVIGATE ESUS trial. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17: 1053-1060 . doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30319-3
• 21 Diener HC, Sacco RL, Easton JD. RE-SPECT ESUS Steering Committee and Investigators. et al. Dabigatran for Prevention of Stroke after Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 1906-1917 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1813959
• 22 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie. Primär- und Sekundärprävention der zerebralen Ischämie. Gemeinsame Leitlinie der DGN und der Deutschen Schlaganfallgesellschaft (DSG). Im Internet: https://www.dgn.org/images/red_leitlinien/LL_2008/archiv/ll08kap_024.pdf ; Stand: 2008
• 23 Häusler KG, Gröschel K, Köhrmann M. et al. Positionspapier zur Detektion von Vorhofflimmern nach ischämischem Schlaganfall. Aktuelle Neurologie 2018; 45: 93-106 . doi:10.1055/s-0043-118476
• 24 Merkler AE, Gialdini G, Yaghi S. et al. Safety Outcomes After Percutaneous Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale. Stroke 2017; 48: 3073-3077 . doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018501
• 25 Volpi JJ, Ridge JR, Nakum M. et al. Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovale compared with medical management in patients with cryptogenic stroke: from the US payer perspective. J Med Econ 2019;