AccScience Publishing / BH / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/bh.8133
MINI-REVIEW

Guidance for the treatment of patent foramen ovale: Classic indications, recent updates, and new consensus perspectives

Christian Pristipino1* Tommaso Guidotti Fanuele2 Nathan Elbeze1 Laurent Sebagh1
Show Less
1 Institut Coeur Paris Centre, Clinique Turin, Paris, France
2 Service de Cardiologie Médicale, Hôpital Cardiovasculaire Louis Pradel, Lyon, France
Received: 23 December 2024 | Accepted: 27 February 2025 | Published online: 20 June 2025
© 2025 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

The paradigm of patent foramen ovale (PFO)-associated syndrome management has been significantly influenced by seminal guidance documents, which underscore the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration and individualized decision-making frameworks. Since the first European Position Papers published in 2018 and 2021, these documents have provided a structured template for the evaluation and treatment of cryptogenic stroke, desaturation syndromes, decompression sickness (DCS), and migraine with aura, thereby facilitating a more nuanced approach to patient care. A critical examination of the current indications for PFO closure reveals a notable lack of evolution over the past 5 years, with recommendations largely mirroring those previously established. Specifically, PFO closure is presently advocated for patients aged 18–60 years with cryptogenic stroke and high-risk features, as well as for select individuals over 60 years following exhaustive exclusion of alternative etiologies. Conversely, PFO closure remains the standard of care for severe desaturation syndromes, is selectively employed for PFO-related DCS, and is considered investigational for migraine with aura. The inherent heterogeneity of PFO-associated syndromes poses a significant challenge to the development of precision-based treatment strategies, highlighting the need for innovative, multidimensional approaches that integrate advanced technologies and personalized algorithms to elucidate distinct phenotypic profiles and optimize therapeutic outcomes. Ultimately, the stagnation of current treatment paradigms underscores the imperative for continued research and clinical innovation, with a focus on refining patient selection criteria and enhancing the efficacy and safety of interventions such as PFO closure.

Keywords
Patent foramen ovale
Cryptogenic stroke
Decompression sickness
Desaturation syndromes
Migraine
Percutaneous closure
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
References
  1. 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. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(38):3182-3195. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy649

 

  1. Wein T, Lindsay MP, Côté R, et al. Canadian stroke best practice recommendations: Secondary prevention of stroke, sixth edition practice guidelines, update 2017. Int J Stroke. 2018;13(4):420-443. doi: 10.1177/1747493017743062

 

  1. Messé SR, Gronseth GS, Kent DM, et al. Practice advisory update summary: Patent foramen ovale and secondary stroke prevention: Report of the guideline subcommittee of the American academy of neurology. Neurology. 2020;94(20):876-885. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009443

 

  1. Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. 2021 Guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: A guideline from the American heart association/American stroke association. Stroke. 2021;52(7):e364-e467. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000375

 

  1. Kavinsky CJ, Szerlip M, Goldsweig AM, et al. SCAI Guidelines for the management of patent foramen ovale. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2022;1(4):100039. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100039

 

  1. Caso V, Turc G, Abdul-Rahim AH, et al. European stroke organisation (ESO) guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patent foramen ovale (PFO) after stroke. Eur Stroke J. 2024;9(4):800-834. doi: 10.1177/23969873241247978

 

  1. Kent DM, Saver JL, Kasner SE, et al. Heterogeneity of treatment effects in an analysis of pooled individual patient data from randomized trials of device closure of patent foramen ovale after stroke. JAMA. 2021;326(22):2277-2286. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.20956

 

  1. Pristipino C, Carroll J, Mas JL, Wunderlich NC, Sondergaard L. Treatment of patent foramen ovale. Eurointervention. 2025;21(10):505-524. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00915

 

  1. Smart D, Mitchell S, Wilmshurst P, Turner M, Banham N. Joint position statement on persistent foramen ovale (PFO) and diving. South pacific underwater medicine society (SPUMS) and the United Kingdom sports diving medical committee (UKSDMC). Diving Hyperb Med. 2015;45(2):129-131.

 

  1. Pristipino C, Germonpré P, Toni D, et al. European position paper on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale. Part II - decompression sickness, migraine, arterial deoxygenation syndromes and select high-risk clinical conditions. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(16):1545-1553. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa1070

 

  1. Ntaios G, Baumgartner H, Doehner W, et al. Embolic strokes of undetermined source: A clinical consensus statement of the ESC council on stroke, the European association of cardiovascular imaging and the European heart rhythm association of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2024;45(19):1701-1715. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae150

 

Share
Back to top
Brain & Heart, Electronic ISSN: 2972-4139 Published by AccScience Publishing