Routine surveillance of pelvic and lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale.
DVT
Determined stroke
ESUS
Ischemic stroke
MRV-pelvis
Pelvic thrombi
Journal
Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis
ISSN: 1573-742X
Titre abrégé: J Thromb Thrombolysis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9502018
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
6
9
2020
medline:
12
2
2022
entrez:
5
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a potential conduit for paradoxical embolization to the systemic atrial circulation of a thrombus originating in the venous system. In a selected group of subjects, the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was assessed. Subjects were identified if they underwent magnetic resonance venography (MRV) pelvis and lower extremity doppler (LE-VDU) for assessment of DVT with PFO. The primary outcome measure was to report the number of patients with paradoxical embolization as their suspected etiology of stroke due to the presence of DVT, which then will be considered as determined stroke. Others with determined stroke diagnosis were reported using Treatment of Acute Stroke Trial (TOAST) criteria. At discharge, those without etiology of their stroke were grouped under embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). We further analyzed the prevalence of DVT by age group, ≤ 60 years vs > 60 years to describe if the prevalence is higher with younger age and to evaluate if higher Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (ROPE) score will have higher number of DVTs compared to lower ROPE scores. Of the 293, 19 (7%) were strokes due to paradoxical embolism. At discharge, determined stroke were 54% vs ESUS were 46%. The overall prevalence of DVT was 19 (7%); MRV-pelvis 13 (4%), and LE-VDU was 9 (3%). No significant difference was noted using both modalities. However, in multivariable regression analysis, a trend suggested an association between pelvic thrombi and high ROPE score as the etiology of stroke; OR 3.56 (0.98, 12.93); p = 0.054. Detection of DVT was not associated with PFO, high ROPE scores or young age. Our data indicate an over-reliance of testing for DVT, particularly MRV pelvis with contrast, in patients with PFO. Clinical studies are needed to identify other factors predictive of DVT in patients with ischemic stroke and PFO.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32888135
doi: 10.1007/s11239-020-02262-w
pii: 10.1007/s11239-020-02262-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1150-1156Références
Lechat P, Mas JL, Lascault G et al (1988) Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. N Engl J Med 318:1148–1152
doi: 10.1056/NEJM198805053181802
Webster MWI, Smith HJ, Sharpe DN et al (1988) Patent foramen ovale in young stroke patients. Lancet 332:11–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(88)92944-3
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(88)92944-3
Cabanes L, Mas JL, Cohen A et al (1993) Atrial septal aneurysm and patent foramen ovale as risk factors for cryptogenic stroke in patients less than 55 years of age A study using transesophageal echocardiography. Stroke 24(12):1865–1873
doi: 10.1161/01.STR.24.12.1865
de Belder MA, Tourikis L, Leech G, Camm AJ (1992) Risk of patent foramen ovale for thromboembolic events in all age groups. Am J Cardiol 69:1316–1320. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(92)91228-V
doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(92)91228-V
pubmed: 1585866
Di Tullio M, Sacco RL, Gopal A et al (1992) Patent foramen ovale as a risk factor for cryptogenic stroke. Ann Intern Med 117:461–465. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-117-6-461
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-117-6-461
pubmed: 1503349
Hausmann D, Mügge A, Becht I, Daniel WG (1992) Diagnosis of patent foramen ovale by transesophageal echocardiography and association with cerebral and peripheral embolic events. Am J Cardiol 70:668–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(92)90210-P
doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(92)90210-P
pubmed: 1510018
Handke M, Harloff A, Olschewski M et al (2007) Patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke in older patients. N Engl J Med 357:2262–2268. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa071422
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa071422
pubmed: 18046029
Saver JL (2016) Cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med 374:2065–2074. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1503946
doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1503946
pubmed: 27223148
Hart RG, Diener HC, Coutts SB et al (2014) Embolic strokes of undetermined source: the case for a new clinical construct. Lancet Neurol 13:429–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70310-7
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70310-7
pubmed: 24646875
Kent DM, Ruthazer R, Weimar C et al (2013) An index to identify stroke-related vs incidental patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke. Neurology 81:619–625. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182a08d59
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182a08d59
pubmed: 23864310
pmcid: 3775694
Thaler DE, Ruthazer R, Weimar C et al (2014) Recurrent stroke predictors differ in medically treated patients with pathogenic vs other PFOs. Neurology 83:221–226. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000000589
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000589
pubmed: 24928123
pmcid: 4117365
Kent DM, Thaler DE (2011) The Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) Study: Developing risk models for application to ongoing randomized trials of percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure for cryptogenic stroke. Trials. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-12-185
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-185
pubmed: 21794121
pmcid: 3170216
Stöllberger C, Slany J, Schuster I et al (1993) The prevalence of deep venous thrombosis in patients with suspected paradoxical embolism. Ann Intern Med 119:461–465. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-119-6-199309150-00003
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-119-6-199309150-00003
pubmed: 8357111
Ranoux D, Cohen A, Cabanes L et al (1993) Patent foramen ovale: is stroke due to paradoxical embolism? Stroke 24:31–34. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.24.1.31
doi: 10.1161/01.STR.24.1.31
pubmed: 8418547
Lethen H, Flachskampf FA, Schneider R et al (1997) Frequency of deep vein thrombosis in patients with patent foramen ovale and ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Am J Cardiol 80:1066–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9149(97)00604-8
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9149(97)00604-8
pubmed: 9352979
Cramer SC, Rordorf G, Maki JH et al (2004) Increased pelvic vein thrombi in cryptogenic stroke: results of the paradoxical emboli from large veins in ischemic stroke (PELVIS) study. Stroke 35:46–50. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000106137.42649.AB
doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000106137.42649.AB
pubmed: 14657451
Homma S, Sacco RL, Di Tullio MR et al (2002) Effect of medical treatment in stroke patients with patent foramen ovale: patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke study. Circulation 105:2625–2631. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000017498.88393.44
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000017498.88393.44
pubmed: 12045168
Steiner MM, Di Tullio MR, Rundek T et al (1998) Patent foramen ovale size and embolic brain imaging findings among patients with ischemic stroke. Stroke 29:944–948. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.29.5.944
doi: 10.1161/01.STR.29.5.944
pubmed: 9596240