Patent Foramen Ovale and Closure Technique with the Amplatzer Occluder
Proof that percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ovale (PFO) is superior to medical treatment is still incomplete. Paradoxical embolism is a rare event occurring over decades rather than years. None of the 4 randomized trials published carried enough patients or was followed up for long enough...
Saved in:
Main Author: | Bernhard Meier |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wiley
2014-01-01
|
Series: | Scientifica |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/129196 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Similar Items
-
Retrieval of Embolized Amplatzer Patent Foramen Ovale Occlusion Device: Issues Related to Late Recognition
by: Allan J. Davies, et al.
Published: (2017-01-01) -
Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Treating Migraine: A Meta-Analysis
by: Yu Zhang, et al.
Published: (2022-01-01) -
Comparison of Patent Foramen Ovale Sizing by Transesophageal Echocardiography and Balloon Sizing in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Closure
by: Birgitte Carbuhn Larsen, MD, et al.
Published: (2025-01-01) -
Antithrombotic Therapy Duration after Patent Foramen Ovale Closure for Stroke Prevention: Impact on Long-Term Outcome
by: Joelle Kefer, et al.
Published: (2022-01-01) -
A Retrospective Analysis of Self-Limiting Fever following Percutaneous Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Defect Closure
by: Francesca Galasso, et al.
Published: (2024-01-01)