Comparison of outcome and complications using different types of devices for percutaneous closure of a secundum atrial septal defect in adults: a single-center experience.

The objective of this study was to find differences in outcome and complications using three different types of devices for percutaneous atrial septal defect (ASD) closure in adults. Percutaneous closure of a secundum‐type ASD is increasingly performed in adult patients. All adult patients who underwent a percutaneous closure of a secundum‐type ASD in our center between November 1996 and November 2004 were included. Failure was defined as dislocation or embolization of the device, which required surgical intervention. Periprocedural and mid‐term complications were registered. Sixty‐five patients, mean age 45.7 ± 18.1 years (18 men, 47 women), underwent a percutaneous closure of an ASD with an ASDOS in 3, an Amplatzer in 36, and a Cardioseal/Starflex closure device in 26 patients. During an overall median follow‐up of 1.2 years (range, 0.1–6.7 years), the failure occurred in four patients, all Cardioseal/Starflex (P = 0.04). Within the Cardioseal/Starflex subgroup, the ASD and device diameters were significantly higher in those patients in whom the primary endpoint occurred compared to the others, 18.8 ± 3.8 vs. 13.0 ± 3.8 mm for ASD diameter (P = 0.01) and 40 (range, 40–43) vs. 33 mm (range, 20–40) for device diameter (P = 0.008). Overall complications were transient arrhythmias in 15.4%, pericardial effusion in 1.5%, and transient ischemic attack in 1.5%. Complete closure 6 months after the procedure occurred in 79.6%, without difference between the devices. Percutaneous ASD closure seems to be a relatively safe and effective procedure. However, using the larger Cardioseal/Starflex devices for closure seems to be related to a higher rate of device dislocation and embolization. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  A. Kelion,et al.  Transthoracic echocardiography using second harmonic imaging with Valsalva manoeuvre for the detection of right to left shunts. , 2004, European journal of echocardiography : the journal of the Working Group on Echocardiography of the European Society of Cardiology.

[2]  D. Hildick-Smith,et al.  Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defects in mature adults: analysis of 76 cases , 2004, Heart.

[3]  K. Sivakumar,et al.  Transcatheter closure of very large (≥ 25 mm) atrial septal defects using the Amplatzer septal occluder , 2003, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[4]  G. Fischer,et al.  Experience with transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defects using the Amplatzer septal occluder: a single centre study in 236 consecutive patients , 2003, Heart.

[5]  P. Brénot,et al.  Percutaneous closure with Amplatzer device is a safe and efficient alternative to surgery in adults with large atrial septal defects. , 2001, American heart journal.

[6]  B. Meier,et al.  Surgical management of complications after transcatheter closure of an atrial septal defect or patent foramen ovale. , 2000, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[7]  P. McLaughlin,et al.  Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects using the Cardio-Seal implant , 2000, Heart.

[8]  B Meier,et al.  Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with paradoxical embolism: long-term risk of recurrent thromboembolic events. , 2000, Circulation.

[9]  P. Ewert,et al.  Transcatheter closure as standard treatment for most interatrial defects: experience in 200 patients treated with the Amplatzer ™ Septal Occluder , 1999, Cardiology in the Young.

[10]  M. Olschewski,et al.  A comparison of surgical and medical therapy for atrial septal defect in adults. , 1995, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  L. Hatle,et al.  Peri-operative complications following surgical closure of atrial septal defect type II in 232 patients--a baseline study. , 1994, European heart journal.

[12]  L. Cohn,et al.  Surgical treatment of adult atrial septal defect: early and long-term results. , 1992, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  B. Gersh,et al.  Long-term outcome after surgical repair of isolated atrial septal defect. Follow-up at 27 to 32 years. , 1990, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  R. Wallace,et al.  Transient protein-losing enteropathy secondary to elevated caval pressures and caval obstruction after the Mustard procedure. , 1976, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[15]  N. Mills,et al.  Nonoperative closure of left-to-right shunts. , 1976, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[16]  C. Steiner,et al.  Secundum Atrial Septal Defect: Nonoperative Closure During Cardiac Catheterization , 1976 .

[17]  M. Campbell,et al.  Natural history of atrial septal defect. , 1970, British heart journal.

[18]  R. J. Craig,et al.  Natural History and Prognosis of Atrial Septal Defect , 1968, Circulation.

[19]  M. Chessa,et al.  CardioSEAL/STARflex versus Amplatzer devices for percutaneous closure of small to moderate (up to 18 mm) atrial septal defects. , 2004, American heart journal.

[20]  D. Hagler,et al.  Transcatheter Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale in patients with presumed paradoxical embolism. , 2004, Mayo Clinic proceedings.