High-Risk PFO, PFO Closure Devices, Cryptogenic Stroke, and Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source

This session defines high-risk PFO, evaluates the superiority of specific closure devices, addresses the impact of PFO closure on mortality and atrial fibrillation, and then covers cryptogenic stroke recurrence risk, MRI features of artery-to-artery embolism, the definition and prevalence of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS), and its presumed embolic sources and treatment uncertainty.

Practitioner-Guided Note

High-risk PFO is defined by a moderate-to-large shunt combined with an atrial septal aneurysm. The Amplatz PFO occluder has demonstrated clear superiority over medical therapy; other device types have not. Post-closure AF is typically transient, resolving within approximately 45 days. ESUS accounts for 80-90% of cryptogenic ischemic strokes; optimal treatment (anticoagulation vs. antiplatelet) remains unestablished.

Key Takeaways

High-risk PFO: moderate-to-large shunt combined with atrial septal aneurysm.Amplatz PFO occluder has demonstrated clear superiority over medical therapy; other devices have not.PFO closure does not increase mortality or myocardial infarction risk.Post-closure AF is typically transient, resolving within approximately 45 days.Cryptogenic stroke generally carries a lower recurrence risk than stroke with an identified cause.MRI showing infarcts of different ages within a single vascular territory suggests artery-to-artery embolism.ESUS: non-lacunar infarct without identifiable major cardiac embolic source; accounts for 80-90% of cryptogenic strokes.Superficial or large deep infarcts in cryptogenic stroke are almost always embolic in origin.Presumed ESUS sources: mild LV dysfunction, mitral annular calcification, PFO, low-burden AF, aortic arch atherosclerosis, non-stenotic unstable plaques.Optimal ESUS treatment (anticoagulation vs. antiplatelet) remains unestablished.