American Journal of Medical Case Reports
ISSN (Print): 2374-2151 ISSN (Online): 2374-216X Website: Editor-in-chief: Samy, I. McFarlane
Open Access
Journal Browser
American Journal of Medical Case Reports. 2020, 8(7), 197-201
DOI: 10.12691/ajmcr-8-7-10
Open AccessCase Report

Large Left Atrial Thrombus on Amplatzer Septal Occluder Secondary to Medication Nonadherence

Naseem A. Hossain1, Pramod Theetha Kariyanna1, Nimrah A. Hossain2, Yuvraj Singh Chowdhury1, Sostanie Takota Enoru1, Apoorva Jayarangaiah3, Moro O. Salifu1 and Samy I. McFarlane1,

1Department of Internal Medicine, State University of New York: Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States- 11203

2Department of Internal Medicine, New York Presbyterian-Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, New York, United States- 11215

3Division of Hematology- Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Albert Einstein College of medicine/Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, N.Y., U.S.A 10461

Pub. Date: April 22, 2020

Cite this paper:
Naseem A. Hossain, Pramod Theetha Kariyanna, Nimrah A. Hossain, Yuvraj Singh Chowdhury, Sostanie Takota Enoru, Apoorva Jayarangaiah, Moro O. Salifu and Samy I. McFarlane. Large Left Atrial Thrombus on Amplatzer Septal Occluder Secondary to Medication Nonadherence. American Journal of Medical Case Reports. 2020; 8(7):197-201. doi: 10.12691/ajmcr-8-7-10


Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a common clinical entity that is encountered in 20-34% of the general population. In most individuals, this anatomical variation is asymptomatic and goes undetected throughout their lives or is only incidentally discovered on cardiac investigations. In situations when the conduit is large enough and when the right atrial pressure exceeds the left atrial pressure, right to left interatrial flow may occur in these individuals. This creates a channel for translocation of air or thrombi from the venous to the arterial circulation, a phenomenon known as paradoxical embolism. Approximately 25-40% of strokes and transient ischemic attacks in patients less than 60 years of age are classified as cryptogenic and studies have identified a higher prevalence (60%) of PFO in young adults with strokes of unidentifiable etiology. Recent trials have demonstrated utility of PFO closure with mechanical devices for secondary prevention of recurrent strokes in patients aged <60 years of age. The general consensus of post-operative management of PFO closure has been largely drawn from randomized controlled trials and comprises use of aspirin and clopidogrel for 6 months followed by use of aspirin alone for at least 5 years. We present a case of an incidentally discovered left intra-atrial thrombus attached to a PFO closure device in a 36-year-old female with a history of cryptogenic stroke three months after implantation.

atrial thrombus foramen ovale amplatzer septal occluder

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit


[1]  Giblett JP, Abdul-Samad O, Shapiro LM, Rana BS, Calvert PA. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in 2019. Interv Cardiol. 2019; 14(1): 34-41.
[2]  Calvert PA, Rana BS, Kydd AC, Shapiro LM. Patent foramen ovale: anatomy, outcomes, and closure. Nature Reviews Cardiology. 2011; 8(3): 148-160.
[3]  Sacco RL, Ellenberg JH, Mohr JP, et al. Infarcts of undetermined cause: The NINCDS stroke data bank. Annals of Neurology. 1989; 25(4): 382-390.
[4]  Lechat P, Mas J, Lascault G, et al. Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. New England Journal of Medicine. 1988; 318(18): 1148-1152.
[5]  Webster M, Smith H, Sharpe D, et al. Patent foramen ovale in young stroke patients. The Lancet. 1988; 332(8601): 11-12.
[6]  Cabanes L, Mas J, Cohen A, et al. Atrial septal aneurysm and patent foramen ovale as risk factors for cryptogenic stroke in patients less than 55 years of age. A study using transesophageal echocardiography. Stroke. 1993; 24(12): 1865-1873.
[7]  de Belder MA, Tourikis L, Leech G, Camm AJ. Risk of patent foramen ovale for thromboembolic events in all age groups. The American journal of cardiology. 1992; 69(16): 1316-1320.
[8]  Di Tullio M, Sacco RL, Gopal A, Mohr J, Homma S. Patent foramen ovale as a risk factor for cryptogenic stroke. Annals of internal medicine. 1992; 117(6): 461-465.
[9]  Mojadidi MK, Zaman MO, Elgendy IY, et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and Patent Foramen Ovale. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2018; 71(9): 1035.
[10]  Cramer SC, Rordorf G, Maki JH, et al. Increased pelvic vein thrombi in cryptogenic stroke: results of the Paradoxical Emboli from Large Veins in Ischemic Stroke (PELVIS) study. Stroke. 2004; 35(1): 46-50.
[11]  Mojadidi MK, Zaman MO, Elgendy IY, et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and Patent Foramen Ovale. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71(9): 1035-1043.
[12]  JA G. Application of a mechanical beart and lung apparatus to cardiac surgery. Minnesota Med. 1954; 37: 171.
[13]  King TD, Thompson SL, Steiner C, Mills NL. Secundum atrial septal defect: nonoperative closure during cardiac catheterization. Jama. 1976; 235(23): 2506-2509.
[14]  Mas JL, Derumeaux G, Guillon B, et al. Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(11): 1011-1021.
[15]  Saver JL, Carroll JD, Thaler DE, et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Medical Therapy after Stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(11): 1022-1032.
[16]  Kent DM, Dahabreh IJ, Ruthazer R, et al. Device Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale After Stroke: Pooled Analysis of Completed Randomized Trials. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2016; 67(8): 907-917.
[17]  Abhishek BS, Bhambhani A. Role of closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic stroke: Current status. Natl Med J India. 2017; 30(5): 268-271.
[18]  Furlan AJ, Reisman M, Massaro J, et al. Closure or medical therapy for cryptogenic stroke with patent foramen ovale. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(11): 991-999.
[19]  Lee PH, Song JK, Kim JS, et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and High-Risk Patent Foramen Ovale: The DEFENSE-PFO Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71(20): 2335-2342.
[20]  Olasinska-Wisniewska A, Grygier M. Antithrombotic/Antiplatelet Treatment in Transcatheter Structural Cardiac Interventions—PFO/ASD/LAA Occluder and Interatrial Shunt Devices. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2019; 6(75).
[21]  Massimo C, Gianfranco B, Mario C. Risk of thrombus formation on devices used to close transcatheter atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2004; 44(8): 1712.
[22]  Yorgun H, Canpolat U, Kaya EB, Aytemir K, Oto A. Thrombus formation during percutaneous closure of an atrial septal defect with an Amplatzer septal occluder. Tex Heart Inst J. 2011; 38(4): 427-430.
[23]  Uysal F, Bostan ÖM, Şenkaya Sığnak I, Güneş M, Çil E. Huge thrombus formation 1 year after percutaneous closure of an atrial septal defect with an Amplatzer septal occluder. Anatol J Cardiol. 2016; 16(1): 63-64.
[24]  Canpolat U, Gürses KM, Sunman H, Kaya EB, Aytemir K, Oto A. Embolic stroke due to left atrial thrombus 2 years after PFO closure. Herz. 2014; 39(1): 161-162.
[25]  Ruge H, Wildhirt SM, Libera P, Vogt M, Holper K, Lange R. Left Atrial Thrombus on Atrial Septal Defect Closure Device as a Source of Cerebral Emboli 3 Years After Implantation. Circulation. 2005; 112(10): e130-e131.
[26]  Kovacevic P, Srdanovic I, Ivanovic V, Rajic J, Petrovic N, Velicki L. Late complications of transcatheter atrial septal defect closure requiring urgent surgery. Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej. 2017; 13(4): 335-338.
[27]  Vanderheyden M, Willaert W, Claessens P, Branders I, Ex P, Vermeersch P. Thrombosis of a patent foramen ovale closure device: thrombolytic management. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002; 56(4): 522-526.
[28]  Krumsdorf U, Ostermayer S, Billinger K, et al. Incidence and clinical course of thrombus formation on atrial septal defect and patient foramen ovale closure devices in 1,000 consecutive patients. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2004; 43(2): 302-309.
[29]  Schuchlenz HW, Mannweiler S, Martin D. Marked foreign body reaction and thrombus formation after transcatheter closure of a patent foramen ovale. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005; 130(2): 591-592.
[30]  Kodankandath TV, Mishra S, Libman RB, Wright P. Recurrent Stroke due to Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Device Thrombus Eight Years after Implantation. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2016; 25(9): e161-e162.
[31]  Anzai H, Child J, Natterson B, et al. Incidence of thrombus formation on the CardioSEAL and the Amplatzer interatrial closure devices. Am J Cardiol. 2004; 93(4): 426-431.
[32]  Rodes-Cabau J, Palacios A, Palacio C, et al. Assessment of the markers of platelet and coagulation activation following transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects. Int J Cardiol. 2005; 98(1): 107-112.
[33]  Bedard E, Rodes-Cabau J, Houde C, et al. Enhanced thrombogenesis but not platelet activation is associated with transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic stroke. Stroke. 2007; 38(1): 100-104.
[34]  Sherman JM, Hagler DJ, Cetta F. Thrombosis after septal closure device placement: a review of the current literature. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004; 63(4): 486-489.
[35]  Kariyanna PT, Jayarangaiah A, Adrah R, Sharma A. Huge Interatrial Septum Aneurysm. American Journal of Medical Case Reports. 2016; 4(3): 111-4.