• Mikhail R Sukernik and Elliott Bennett-Guerrero.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA. mrs21@columbia.edu
• Anesth. Analg. 2007 Sep 1; 105 (3): 602610602-10.

AbstractWith the increased use of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, patent foramen ovale (PFO) has become a common finding during heart surgery. This finding presents a difficult dilemma for cardiac surgeons, since the impact of intraoperatively diagnosed PFOs on postoperative outcome is unknown. Changes in the surgical plan required for closure of a PFO subject the patient to the possibility of additional risk. On the other hand, a decision to not close a PFO exposes the patient to unclear immediate and long-term consequences. Deciding whether or not to close a PFO currently depends on the clinicians' personal preferences, the probability of intraoperative and postoperative hypoxemia, and any anticipated deviation from the initial surgical plan. Most clinicians agree that an intraoperatively diagnosed PFO must be closed when surgery leads to a high risk of hypoxemia (e.g., left ventricular assist devices placement, heart transplantation); should be closed in most cases when minimal deviation from the initial surgical plan is needed for PFO closure (e.g., mitral valve or tricuspid valve surgeries); and probably, should be closed during heart surgeries performed without atriotomy and bicaval cannulation when the risk of perioperative or remote PFO-related complications is increased. The recent development of percutaneous methods of PFO closure provides a valuable backup for those cases when PFO is not closed and postoperative hypoxemia or other complications may be attributable to the uncorrected PFO.

18 keywords...

hide…