Deans' stroke musings: Tipping Point for Patent Foramen Ovale Closure

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Tipping Point for Patent Foramen Ovale Closure

I guess you are totally on your own figuring out what to do about your PFO.
https://t.co/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nejm.org%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1056%2FNEJMe1709637%3Ft%3D1%26cn%3DZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%253D%253D%26refsrc%3Demail%26iid%3Dcb00a62393a84227adf05b182070a13e%26uid%3D625967110%26nid%3D244%2B281088008&t=1&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&sig=7432cdbdb9033dd29ba4f63fdee9bf216c0831c0&iid=cb00a62393a84227adf05b182070a13e&uid=625967110&nid=244+281088008

Allan H. Ropper, M.D.

N Engl J Med 2017; 377:1093-1095September 14, 2017DOI: 10.1056/NEJMe1709637

This article has no abstract; the first 100 words appear below.

On the basis of what I had read previously in the Journal, I recently explained to my 44-year-old patient that closing his patent foramen ovale (PFO) after his stroke was not advisable. How can we now have three trials showing that closure prevents recurrent stroke, given that in the past 5 years, the Journal published articles from three other trials that showed the opposite? It would be simple if the conversion from a negative to a positive outlook with respect to PFO closure could be explained by studying the various antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments, or the various durations of follow-up . . .

Disclosure forms provided by the author are available with the full text of this editorial at NEJM.org.

Access this article: Subscribe to NEJM | Purchase this article