IJCS | Volume 33, Nº4, July and August 2020

309 Figure 1 - Flow Diagram of Studies selection. Pereira et al. Patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke Int J Cardiovasc Sci. 2020; 33(4):307-317 Original Article therapy alone for secondary prevention of patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale were published. These studies involved a total of 3,750 patients who were randomly assigned to either closure with the percutaneous device (closure group) or medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). Concerning the acronyms, CLOSURE 1 denotes “Evaluation of the STARFlex Septal Closure System in Patients with a Stroke and/or Transient Ischemic Attack due to Presumed Paradoxical Embolism through a Patent Foramen Ovale”, RESPECT “Randomized Evaluation of Recurrent Stroke Comparing PFO Closure to Established Current Standard of Care Treatment”, PC trial “Clinical Trial Comparing Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) using the Amplatzer PFO Occluder with Medical Treatment in Patients with Cryptogenic Embolism”, CLOSE “Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulants versus Antiplatelet Therapy to Prevent Stroke Recurrence”, REDUCE “GORE HELEX Septal Occluder / GORE CARDIOFORM Septal Occluder and Antiplatelet Medical Management for Reduction of Recurrent Stroke or Imaging-Confirmed TIA in Patients with Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) - The Gore REDUCE Clinical Study”, DEFENSE PFO “Device Closure Versus