Cryptogenic Stroke and its Connection to Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO)

Meizoso Ramos^*
*Correspondence: Meizoso Ramos, Department of Surgery, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, USA, Email:

Introduction

Cryptogenic stroke represents a significant medical mystery, accounting for a large portion of ischemic strokes where no clear cause can be identified despite extensive investigation. Approximately 30-40% of ischemic strokes are classified as cryptogenic, a term derived from the Greek word â??kryptos,â? meaning hidden. The lack of a definitive etiology in these cases poses a challenge for clinicians who seek to understand the underlying mechanisms and prevent recurrent strokes. However, emerging evidence has begun to shed light on a potential link between cryptogenic strokes and Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO), a congenital heart defect that may serve as a conduit for embolic events. Understanding the connection between cryptogenic stroke and PFO is crucial for improving treatment strategies, preventing recurrence, and enhancing the quality of life for affected individuals [1].

Description

Patent foramen ovale is a hole between the left and right atria of the heart that persists from fetal circulation into adulthood in approximately 25% of the population. In most individuals, the foramen ovale naturally closes shortly after birth as a part of the transition to independent circulation. However, in a subset of individuals, this opening remains patent throughout life. While often asymptomatic, a PFO may act as a pathway for emboliclots or other particles-that form in the venous system and bypass the lungs, entering the arterial circulation and potentially causing an ischemic event in the brain. This mechanism, known as a paradoxical embolism, has been hypothesized as a key contributor to cryptogenic strokes, particularly in younger patients without traditional vascular risk factors. The connection between cryptogenic stroke and PFO has garnered increasing attention in the past few decades, particularly in patients who present with unexplained strokes, especially in those under the age of 55. Studies have shown that PFO is more commonly found in individuals with cryptogenic stroke compared to the general population, leading to the hypothesis that PFO may be a potential source of embolic stroke in these cases. The role of PFO as a causative factor in stroke is thought to be enhanced by additional factors such as hypercoagulable states, venous thromboembolism, or increased right atrial pressure, which can increase the likelihood of a paradoxical embolism. In the absence of these underlying conditions, however, it remains unclear whether the presence of a PFO alone is sufficient to cause a stroke or if other, as yet unidentified, factors contribute to the risk [2].

The diagnosis of PFO in patients with cryptogenic stroke typically involves imaging studies such as Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE) and Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE). The latter is considered the gold standard for detecting PFO, as it offers superior visualization of the atrial septum and allows for the assessment of any potential shunting between the atria. In addition to echocardiography, agitated saline or bubble contrast studies can be employed to evaluate for right-to-left shunting, a sign that emboli may be bypassing the lungs and entering systemic circulation. When a PFO is detected, further investigation into potential hypercoagulable states, such as antiphospholipid syndrome or clotting disorders, may be warranted, as these conditions can further increase the likelihood of a paradoxical embolism. In clinical practice, the identification of PFO in a patient with cryptogenic stroke often leads to the consideration of both medical and procedural interventions. The primary goal is to prevent recurrence, as cryptogenic stroke patients without a definitive cause are often left with uncertainty regarding how to mitigate their stroke risk. Traditionally, treatment has involved antiplatelet therapy, such as aspirin, to reduce the likelihood of clot formation. However, as the connection between PFO and cryptogenic stroke has become clearer, more aggressive treatments have emerged, including anticoagulation and PFO closure [3].

Anticoagulant therapy, typically with warfarin or Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs), is often considered in patients with cryptogenic stroke and a confirmed PFO, particularly when additional risk factors, such as venous thromboembolism or a history of deep vein thrombosis, are present. However, the optimal duration and type of anticoagulation therapy remain topics of ongoing debate, as the risk of recurrent stroke must be weighed against the potential complications of long-term anticoagulation. PFO closure, a procedure in which a device is implanted to seal the hole between the atria, has been shown to be effective in preventing recurrent strokes in certain subgroups of patients. Several large clinical trials, such as RESPECT, REDUCE, and CLOSE, have evaluated the role of PFO closure in cryptogenic stroke patients, demonstrating that the procedure can significantly reduce the risk of recurrent strokes in those with a large shunt or other high-risk features, such as a history of deep vein thrombosis or a large stroke. While PFO closure appears to be most beneficial for younger patients with no significant vascular risk factors, the procedure is not without risks, including complications related to the device, the need for anticoagulation therapy, and the potential for long-term follow-up care [4].

Beyond medical and procedural interventions, lifestyle modifications play an essential role in managing stroke risk, particularly in patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO. Lifestyle factors such as smoking cessation, regular exercise, and a heart-healthy diet are all important components of secondary stroke prevention. Additionally, addressing modifiable risk factors such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes can help reduce the overall burden of vascular disease, regardless of the underlying cause of the stroke. Psychological support and counseling may also be beneficial, as patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO often experience heightened anxiety and stress due to the uncertainty surrounding their diagnosis. Providing reassurance, encouraging regular follow-up care, and addressing concerns about stroke recurrence are essential aspects of comprehensive stroke management. Despite the growing body of evidence linking PFO to cryptogenic stroke, several important questions remain unanswered. Not all patients with PFO experience strokes, and not all patients with cryptogenic stroke have PFO, suggesting that other factors may contribute to the pathogenesis of stroke in this population. Furthermore, the decision to close a PFO or to initiate anticoagulation therapy remains complex, with individual patient characteristics, such as age, stroke severity, and comorbid conditions, influencing the optimal treatment approach. Additional research is needed to better define the role of PFO in cryptogenic stroke and to identify the patients who are most likely to benefit from invasive treatments such as PFO closure [5].

Conclusion

In conclusion, the connection between cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale is an evolving area of research that offers new insights into the pathophysiology of ischemic stroke. While the exact mechanisms remain incompletely understood, the growing recognition of PFO as a potential cause of cryptogenic stroke has led to the development of targeted interventions such as anticoagulation and PFO closure. Although these treatments offer promising outcomes for select patient populations, the complexity of the condition underscores the importance of individualized care, ongoing monitoring, and continued research. As our understanding of the link between PFO and cryptogenic stroke deepens, the potential for more effective prevention and management strategies will continue to improve, ultimately reducing the burden of stroke for many individuals.

Acknowledgment

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Mac Grory, Brian, E. Magnus Ohman, Wuwei Feng and Ying Xian, et al. "Advances in the management of cardioembolic stroke associated with patent foramen ovale." BMJ376 (2022).

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

2. Baumgartner, Helmut, Julie De Backer, Sonya V. Babu-Narayan and Werner Budts, et al. "2020 ESC Guidelines for the management of adult congenital heart disease: The Task Force for the management of adult congenital heart disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC), International Society for Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ISACHD)." Eur Heart J 42 (2021): 563-645.

 Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

3. Schneider, Birke, Thomas Hofmann, Maria H. Justen and Thomas Meinertz. "Chiari's network: Normal anatomic variant or risk factor for arterial embolic events?." J Am Coll Cardiol 26 (1995): 203-210.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

4. vKent, David M., Jeffrey L. Saver, Scott E. Kasner and Jason Nelson, 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." JAMA326 (2021): 2277-2286.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

5. Lechat, P. H., Jean-Louis Mas, Gilles Lascault and P. H. Loron, et al. "Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke." N Engl J Med 318 (1988): 1148-1152.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at