Abstract TMP106: Pooled Analysis Of Five Randomized Trials Comparing Device Closure Of Patent Foramen Ovale After Stroke To Medical Treatment: Impact Of Residual Shunt On Stroke Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure is effective for secondary stroke prevention in well selected patients. After device implantation some patients have residual shunting. There was no impact of incomplete closure on recurrent stroke risk in any of the trials but outcome rates are low with little power to detect an effect. Hypothesis: Patients with residual shunts after PFO closure have more recurrent strokes than those with complete elimination of shunting. Methods: We pooled individual patient data from 5 of 6 randomized clinical trials comparing medical therapy to PFO closure + medical therapy. Residual shunt data were not available for 1 trial. This analysis only includes PFO closure subjects. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for age, sex, coronary disease, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, prior stroke/TIA, smoking, index event (stroke vs TIA), hypermobile septum, shunt size (large vs small) and infarct location (superficial vs deep). Multiple imputation of missing values for adjusted variables was used. Results: Among 1475 patients treated with PFO closure and with non-missing residual shunt data, 149 (10%) had incomplete closure. The median time from procedure to shunt measurement was 204 days (25 th -75 th percentile, 181-722). In the complete closure group the primary endpoint of recurrent ischemic stroke occurred in 30 patients (2.3%; 95% CI 1.5-3.2%) compared to 4 (2.7%; 95% CI 0.7-6.7%) with incomplete closure. Unadjusted and adjusted HRs comparing incomplete vs complete closure were 1.37 (0.48, 3.92) and 1.69 (0.37, 4.95) respectively. The secondary endpoint of recurrent ischemic stroke, TIA, or vascular death occurred in 66 (5.0%; 95% CI 3.9-6.3%) patients with complete closure compared to 9 (6.0%; 95% CI 2.8-11.2%) without. Unadjusted and adjusted HRs were 1.26 (0.63, 2.54) and 1.39 (0.68, 2.83) respectively. Conclusions: Our pooled analysis of individual subjects after PFO closure from 5 of 6 relevant randomized clinical trials, showed no association between residual shunt and recurrent stroke events. This analysis was limited by low rates of residual shunt and recurrent events even in this large, combined dataset.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".