Patent foramen ovale and migraine in ischemic stroke patients: incidence, pathogenetic interrelation and the effects of endovascular closure

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a chronic neurovascular disease with high incidence rate and medical-social significance. Despite more than half a century of studying the disease, the pathogenesis of migraine is not yet completely clear. The results of separate research works demonstrate the inter-relation of migraine with the presence of patent foramen ovale and circulation shunting from the right side to the left one.

AIM: Detailing the incidence rates and the clinical characteristics of migraine, as well as the effects of endovascular installation of the occluding device into the patent foramen ovale in terms of migraine course in a cohort of patients that had an ischemic stroke episode according to the mechanism of paradoxical embolism due to having a functionally significant patent foramen ovale.

METHODS: The examined population included 97 patients aged from 18 to 50 years old (mean age 32.29±2.19 years; 70.8% females), undergoing examination procedures at the Research Center of Neurology from January 2018 until October 2023. All the patients previously had an ischemic stroke that had involved the mechanism of paradoxical embolism, associated with the presence of patent foramen ovale and high functional significance shunting. All the patients underwent an assessment of their conditions associated with the presence of a patent foramen ovale — migraine with or without aura, other procedures included the detailing of headache characteristics and of the effects of migraine on social adaptation. The endovascular intervention was performed in 61 patients. Dynamic follow-up data were obtained for 36 patients, of which 24 migraine patients had an assessment of headache characteristics before and after the foramen ovale closure.

RESULTS: Within the cohort of patients with patent foramen ovale accompanied with functionally significant shunting and with a previous episode of ischemic stroke, the incidence of migraine was 39.2% (no aura — 21 patients or 55%; with aura — 17, or 45%), while the proportions of women and men being 1.9:1. The rate of headache attacks was 4 [1; 7] days per month. In 6 months after the installation of the foramen ovale occluder, migraine patients were showing a significant decrease in the rate of headache onsets from 4 [2; 24] to 2 [1; 5] days a month (р=0.009); a decrease was reported for pain intensity from 7 [7; 9] to 3 [3; 7] points of the visual analogue scale for pain (р=0.0001) along with a decrease in the degree of migraine affecting the patients’ everyday activity from 20 [6; 89] to 17 [2; 26] points (р=0.019) of the MIDAS questionnaire.

CONCLUSION: The present research has confirmed the high incidence found in a cohort of patients with patent foramen ovale. Installation of the occluder resulted in a decrease in the rate and intensity of headache along with a decrease of migraine affecting the social adaptation. The research limitations were a small number of patients and the absence of data on the residual shunting circulation.

About the authors

Anastasia V. Belopasova

Research Center of Neurology

Author for correspondence.
Email: belopasova@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3124-2443
SPIN-code: 3149-3053

MD, PhD

Russian Federation, Moscow

Andrey O. Chechetkin

Research Center of Neurology

Email: chechetkin@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8726-8928
SPIN-code: 9394-6995

MD, PhD

Russian Federation, Moscow

Viktor D. Merezhko

Tver State Medical University

Email: merezhko.vitya@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0001-7982-8956
Russian Federation, Tver

References

  1. GBD 2016 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390(10100):1211–1259. EDN: YGEVZQ doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32154-2
  2. Burch RC, Buse DC, Lipton RB. Migraine: Epidemiology, burden, and comorbidity. Neurol Clin. 2019;37(4):631–649. doi: 10.1016/j.ncl.2019.06.001
  3. Hara H, Virmani R, Ladich E, et al. Patent foramen ovale: Current pathology, pathophysiology, and clinical status. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(9):1768–1776. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.038
  4. Каршиева А.Р., Чечеткин А.О., Белопасова А.В., Добрынина Л.А. Диагностические критерии определения вида право-левого шунта при контрастной транскраниальной доплерографии у молодых пациентов с ишемическим острым нарушением мозгового кровообращения // Российский неврологический журнал. 2023. Т. 28, № 2. С. 38–45. [Karshieva AR, Chechetkin AO, Belopasova AV, Dobrynina LA. Diagnostic criteria for determining the type of the right-to-left shunt using contrast-enhanced transcranial doppler ultrasound in young patients with ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack. Russ Neurolog J. 2023;28(2):38–45]. EDN: IQBLWG doi: 10.30629/2658-7947-2023-28-2-38-45
  5. Jauss M, Zanette E. Detection of right-to-left shunt with ultrasound contrast agent and transcranial Doppler sonography. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2000;10(6):490–496. doi: 10.1159/000016119
  6. Del SM, Angeli S, Leandri M, et al. Migraine with aura and right-to-left shunt on transcranial Doppler: A case-control study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 1998;8:327–330. doi: 10.1159/000015875
  7. Wammes van der Heijden EA, Tijssen CC, Egberts AC. Right-to-left shunt and migraine: The strength of the relationship. Cephalalgia. 2006;26(2):208–213. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2005.01024.x
  8. Ben-Assa E, Rengifo-Moreno P, Al-Bawardy R, et al. Effect of residual interatrial shunt on migraine burden after transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(3):293–302. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.042
  9. Mas JL, Guillon B, Charles-Nelson A, et al.; CLOSE investigators. Patent foramen ovale closure in stroke patients with migraine in the CLOSE trial. The CLOSE-MIG study. Eur J Neurol. 2021;28(8):2700–2707. doi: 10.1111/ene.14892
  10. Tobis MJ, Azarbal B. Does patent foramen ovale promote cryptogenic stroke and migraine headache? Tex Heart Inst J. 2005;32(3):362–365.
  11. Wilmshurst PT. Migraine with aura and persistent foramen ovale. Eye (Lond). 2018;32(2):184–188. doi: 10.1038/eye.2017.269
  12. West BH, Noureddin N, Mamzhi Y, et al. Frequency of patent foramen ovale and migraine in patients with cryptogenic stroke. Stroke. 2018;49(5):1123–1128. EDN: TJRSYG doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.020160
  13. Sacco S, Harriott AM, Ayata C, et al. Microembolism and other links between migraine and stroke: Clinical and pathophysiologic update. Neurology. 2023;100(15):716–726. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000201699
  14. Borgdorff P, Tangelder GJ. Migraine: Possible role of shear-induced platelet aggregation with serotonin release. Headache. 2012;52(8):1298–1318. EDN: RKTMTR doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2012.02162.x
  15. Takano T, Tian GF, Peng W, et al. Cortical spreading depression causes and coincides with tissue hypoxia. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10(6):754–762. doi: 10.1038/nn1902
  16. Dalkara T, Nozari A, Moskowitz MA. Migraine aura pathophysiology: The role of blood vessels and microembolisation. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(3):309–317. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70358-8
  17. Nozari A, Dilekoz E, Sukhotinsky I, et al. Microemboli may link spreading depression, migraine aura, and patent foramen ovale. Ann Neurol. 2010;67(2):221–229. doi: 10.1002/ana.21871
  18. Bridges ND, Hellenbrand W, Latson L, et al. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale after presumed paradoxical embolism. Circulation. 1992;86(6):1902–1908. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.86.6.1902
  19. Wilmshurst PT, Nightingale S, Walsh KP, et al. Effect on migraine of closure of cardiac right-to-left shunts to prevent recurrence of decompression illness or stroke or for haemodynamic reasons. Lancet. 2000;356(9242):1648–1651. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03160-3
  20. Dowson A, Mullen MJ, Peatfield R, et al. Migraine intervention with STARFlex Technology (MIST) trial: A prospective, multicenter, double-blind, sham-controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of patent foramen ovale closure with STARFlex septal repair implant to resolve refractory migraine headache. Circulation. 2008;117(11):1397–1404. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.727271. Erratum in: Circulation. 2009;120(9):e71–72.
  21. Mirza MR, González-Martín A, Graybill WS, et al. Prospective evaluation of the tolerability and efficacy of niraparib dosing based on baseline body weight and platelet count: Results from the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial. Cancer. 2023;129(12):1846–1855. EDN: AVVEJV doi: 10.1002/cncr.34706
  22. Tobis JM, Charles A, Silberstein SD, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with migraine: The PREMIUM trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(22):2766–2774. EDN: YKCBPL doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.09.1105
  23. Kent DM, Thaler DE. RoPE study investigators. The risk of paradoxical embolism (RoPE) study: Developing risk models for application to ongoing randomized trials of percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure for cryptogenic stroke. Trials. 2011;12:185. EDN: MZWCEU doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-185
  24. Headache classification committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(1):1–211. doi: 10.1177/0333102417738202
  25. Pristipino C, Sievert H, D’Ascenzo F, et al. Evidence Synthesis Team; Eapci Scientific Documents and Initiatives Committee; International Experts. European position paper on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale. General approach and left circulation thromboembolism. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(38):3182–3195. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy649
  26. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Dowson AJ, Sawyer J. Development and testing of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire to assess headache-related disability. Neurology. 2001;56(1):20–28. doi: 10.1212/wnl.56.suppl_1.s20
  27. Kumar P, Kijima Y, West BH, et al. The connection between patent foramen ovale and migraine. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2019;29(2):261–270. doi: 10.1016/j.nic.2019.01.006
  28. Liboni W, Molinari F, Allais GB, et al. Patent foramen ovale detected by near-infrared spectroscopy in patients suffering from migraine with aura. Neurol Sci. 2008;29(Suppl 1): S182–185. doi: 10.1007/s10072-008-0920-7
  29. Buse DC, Loder EW, Gorman JA, et al. Sex differences in the prevalence, symptoms, and associated features of migraine, probable migraine and other severe headache: Results of the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. Headache. 2013;53(8):1278–1299. doi: 10.1111/head.12150
  30. Anzola GP, Meneghetti G, Zanferrari C, et al. Is migraine associated with right-to-left shunt a separate disease? Results of the SAM study. Cephalalgia. 2008;28(4):360–366. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2008.01539.x
  31. Khessali H, Mojadidi MK, Gevorgyan R, et al. The effect of patent foramen ovale closure on visual aura without headache or typical aura with migraine headache. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(6):682–687. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.03.013
  32. Vigna C, Marchese N, Inchingolo V, et al. Improvement of migraine after patent foramen ovale percutaneous closure in patients with subclinical brain lesions: A case-control study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(2):107–113. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2008.10.011
  33. Rigatelli G, Dell’Avvocata F, Ronco F, et al. Primary transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure is effective in improving migraine in patients with high-risk anatomic and functional characteristics for paradoxical embolism. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(3):282–287. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.11.019
  34. Kimmelstiel C, Gange C, Thaler D. Is patent foramen ovale closure effective in reducing migraine symptoms? A controlled study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69(5):740–746. doi: 10.1002/ccd.21025
  35. He Q, Zhang Y, Wang F, et al. Impact of right-to-left shunt and transcatheter closure on the clinical features of migraine. Int J Neurosci. 2020;130(3):270–275. EDN: FUAAQB doi: 10.1080/00207454.2019.1672681
  36. Wintzer-Wehekind J, Horlick E, Ibrahim R, et al. Effect of clopidogrel and aspirin vs aspirin alone on migraine headaches after transcatheter atrial septal defect closure: One-year results of the CANOA randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6(2):209–213. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.4297
  37. Sommer RJ, Nazif T, Privitera L, Robbins BT. Retrospective review of thienopyridine therapy in migraineurs with patent foramen ovale. Neurology. 2018;91(22):1002–1009. doi: 10.1212/wnl.0000000000006572
  38. Capodanno D, Valgimigli M, Byrne R, Kunadian V. European position paper on the management of patients with patent foramen ovale. Part II: Decompression sickness, migraine, arterial deoxygenation syndromes and select high-risk clinical conditions. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(16):1545–1553. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa1070

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Flowchart of the algorithm used for distributing patients into research groups.

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Dynamic changes in the frequency and intensity of headache before and after the installation of PFO occluder.

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Dynamics of the level of social maladaptation of patients with migraine before and after installation of an oval window occluder.

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Eco-Vector

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».