Retinal arterial occlusion and patent foramen ovale: A case study-based review

S Fekri,P Mahmoudimehr,M Jafari Fesharaki,E Hosseinjani,S-H Abtahi,H Nouri
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfo.2023.07.022
Abstract:Purpose: To identify all reported cases of retinal artery occlusion (RAO) associated with patent foramen ovale (PFO) in the literature and present a similar case of CRAO from our clinic. Methods: PubMed database was searched for studies reporting RAO in individuals with PFO. Relevant data were tabulated and reviewed. We estimated each case's Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score. Results: 23 cases of CRAO (n=10; including ours), BRAO (n=10), and CILRAO (n=3) were reviewed. Most cases were under 50 years of age (78.3%). The reported predisposing factors were: hypertension (26.1%), migraine (17.3%), smoking (13.0%), recent immobilization (13.0%), strenuous exertion (8.7%), pregnancy (8.7%), and diabetes (4.3%). A high RoPE score (≥7; suggestive of paradoxical embolism via PFO) was estimated for 71.4% of patients. In most cases, the neurological and cardiovascular examinations, laboratory studies, and imaging were unremarkable, except for the PFO±atrial septal aneurysm (present in 21.7%). In only 28.6% of cases, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) (± saline contrast) could visualize the PFO; transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was necessary to detect the PFO in 71.4%. Approximately one-half of the patients underwent percutaneous closure of the PFO; no complications or subsequent acute ischemic events ensued. The visual prognosis was poorer for CRAO than for BRAO or CILRAO. Conclusion: Timely diagnosis, acute management, and ensuring urgent initiation of stroke workup in cases with RAO or transient monocular vision loss are crucial. Clues to a possible paradoxical embolism as the cause include the absence of known cardiovascular risk factors, young age, migraine, recent immobility, vigorous exercise, and pregnancy.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?