On the basis of what I had read previously in the Journal, I recently explained to my 44-year-old patient that closing his patent foramen ovale (PFO) after his stroke was not advisable. How can we now have three trials showing that closure prevents recurrent stroke, given that in the past 5 years, the Journal published articles from three other trials that showed the opposite? It would be simple if the conversion from a negative to a positive outlook with respect to PFO closure could be explained by studying the various antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments, or the various durations of follow-up . . .

中文翻译：

---

封闭卵圆孔的引爆点

根据我以前在《华尔街日报》上所读的内容，我最近向我的44岁患者解释说，不宜在中风后关闭卵圆孔未闭（PFO）。鉴于在过去的5年中，《华尔街日报》发表了其他三项试验显示相反的文章，我们现在如何才能有三项试验显示闭合性治疗可以预防中风复发？如果可以通过研究各种抗血小板和抗凝治疗方法或随访的不同持续时间来解释PFO封闭从消极转变为积极的观点，那将是很简单的。。。