Pooled Analysis of PFO Occluder Device Trials in Patients With PFO and Migraine.

Mojadidi, Mohammad K; Kumar, Preetham; Mahmoud, Ahmed N; Elgendy, Islam Y; Shapiro, Hilary; West, Brian; Charles, Andrew C; Mattle, Heinrich P.; Sorensen, Sherman; Meier, Bernhard; Silberstein, Stephen D; Tobis, Jonathan M (2021). Pooled Analysis of PFO Occluder Device Trials in Patients With PFO and Migraine. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 77(6), pp. 667-676. Elsevier 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.068

Text Mojadidi__2021__Pooled_Analysis_of_PFO_Occluder_Device_Trials.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (515kB) | Request a copy

BACKGROUND

Although observational studies have shown percutaneous patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure to be a safe means of reducing the frequency and duration of migraine, randomized clinical trials have not met their primary efficacy endpoints.

OBJECTIVES

The authors report the results of a pooled analysis of individual participant data from the 2 randomized trials using the Amplatzer PFO Occluder to assess the efficacy and safety of percutaneous device closure as a therapy for episodic migraine with or without aura.

METHODS

The authors analyzed individual patient-level data from 2 randomized migraine trials (the PRIMA [Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Migraine With Aura] and PREMIUM [Prospective Randomized Investigation to Evaluate Incidence of Headache Reduction in Subjects with Migraine and PFO Using the Amplatzer PFO Occluder Compared to Medical Management] studies). Efficacy endpoints were mean reduction in monthly migraine days, responder rate (defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine attacks), mean reduction in monthly migraine attacks, and percentage of patients who experienced complete cessation of migraine. The safety endpoint was major procedure- and device-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 337 subjects, 176 were randomized by blocks to device closure and 161 to medical treatment only. At 12-month follow-up, the analysis met 3 of the 4 efficacy endpoints: mean reduction of monthly migraine days (-3.1 days vs. -1.9 days; p = 0.02), mean reduction of monthly migraine attacks (-2.0 vs. -1.4; p = 0.01), and number of subjects who experienced complete cessation of migraine (14 [9%] vs. 1 [0.7%]; p < 0.001). For the safety analysis, 9 procedure-related and 4 device-related adverse events occurred in 245 subjects who eventually received devices. All events were transient and resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis of patient-level data demonstrates that PFO closure was safe and significantly reduced the mean number of monthly migraine days and monthly migraine attacks, and resulted in a greater number of subjects who experienced complete migraine cessation.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 30 Jun 2021
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item