Second transcatheter closure for residual shunt following percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale

被引:4
|
作者
Susuri, Njomeza [1 ]
Obeid, Slayman [2 ]
Ulmi, Mirjam [1 ]
Siontis, George C. M. [1 ]
Wahl, Andreas [1 ]
Windecker, Stephan [1 ]
Nietlispach, Fabian [2 ]
Meier, Bernhard [1 ]
Praz, Fabien [1 ]
机构
[1] Bern Univ Hosp, Dept Cardiol, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
[2] Univ Hosp Zurich, Univ Heart Ctr, Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
patent foramen ovale; prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack; specific closure device/technique; RECURRENT CEREBROVASCULAR EVENTS; AMPLATZER PFO OCCLUDER; ATRIAL SEPTAL ANEURYSM; CRYPTOGENIC STROKE; PARADOXICAL EMBOLISM; MEDICAL-TREATMENT; DEVICE CLOSURE; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; THERAPY; IMPLANTATION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims: Residual shunt following percutaneous patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure has been described in up to 49% of patients and is associated with recurrent cerebrovascular events. Our aim was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and midterm outcomes of transcatheter residual shunt closure. Methods and results: From 1994 to July 2016, 2,679 patients underwent transcatheter PFO closure for treatment of presumed paradoxical embolism at our institution. Among them, 100 patients (3.7%) were referred for residual shunt closure. They constituted the study population for which a retrospective analysis of the prospectively gathered procedural data was performed along with prospective acquisition of follow-up data. The indication for initial PFO closure was an ischaemic cerebrovascular event in 85% of the patients. Patients underwent transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) for PFO diagnosis and again for residual shunt assessment at about six months. All procedures were performed under fluoroscopic guidance only. At the first procedure, 10 different devices had been used. The AMPLATZER PFO Occluder accounted for 54% and the AMPLATZER Cribriform Occluder for 28%. Compared to the whole population (n=2,679), a significantly higher rate of atrial septal aneurysm (58% versus 36%; p=0.024), a larger implanted device (47% versus 13%; p<0.001) were observed in the patients with residual shunt. Six patients (6%) experienced a recurrent TIA or ischaemic stroke before the second intervention. Residual shunt closure was successful in all but two patients. A second AMPLATZER PFO Occluder was used in the majority of the repeat interventions (76%). There were no complications. TOE, obtained again after 7 +/- 5 months in 88 of the 98 patients with a device in place (90%), showed complete closure in 81%. In eight patients (0.3% of the whole cohort), a third device was implanted, resulting in complete closure in all. Conclusions: Transcatheter residual shunt closure after initial percutaneous PFO closure can be safely performed under fluoroscopic guidance only and achieves complete closure in most patients. The use of larger devices, typically prompted by intricate anatomy, represents a risk factor for shunt persistence and the need for reintervention.
引用
收藏
页码:858 / 866
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The Coherex FlatStent™: an advance in patent foramen ovale closure
    Ruygrok, Peter N.
    EXPERT REVIEW OF MEDICAL DEVICES, 2010, 7 (02) : 193 - 199
  • [42] Patent foramen ovale and ventricular septal defect closure
    Wahl, A.
    Meier, B.
    HEART, 2009, 95 (01) : 70 - 82
  • [43] Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and cryptogenic stroke
    Thanopoulos, Basil D.
    Dardas, Petros D.
    Karanasios, Evangelos
    Mezilis, Nicholaos
    CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2006, 68 (05) : 741 - 746
  • [44] Long-Term Experience and Outcomes With Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale
    Inglessis, Ignacio
    Elmariah, Sammy
    Rengifo-Moreno, Pablo A.
    Margey, Ronan
    O'Callaghan, Caitlin
    Cruz-Gonzalez, Ignacio
    Baron, Suzanne
    Mehrotra, Praveen
    Tan, Timothy C.
    Hung, Judy
    Demirjian, Zareh N.
    Buonanno, Ferdinando S.
    Ning, MingMing
    Silverman, Scott B.
    Cubeddu, Roberto J.
    Pomerantsev, Eugene
    Schainfeld, Robert M.
    Dec, G. William, Jr.
    Palacios, Igor F.
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2013, 6 (11) : 1176 - 1183
  • [45] Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale with a novel FlatStent™
    Reiffenstein, Isabel
    Majunke, Nicolas
    Wunderlich, Nina
    Carter, Phillip
    Jones, Randall
    Sievert, Horst
    EXPERT REVIEW OF MEDICAL DEVICES, 2008, 5 (04) : 419 - 425
  • [46] Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale in Cryptogenic Embolism
    Meier, Bernhard
    Kalesan, Bindu
    Mattle, Heinrich P.
    Khattab, Ahmed A.
    Hildick-Smith, David
    Dudek, Dariusz
    Andersen, Grethe
    Ibrahim, Reda
    Schuler, Gerhard
    Walton, Antony S.
    Wahl, Andreas
    Windecker, Stephan
    Jueni, Peter
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2013, 368 (12): : 1083 - 1091
  • [47] Current Indications for Percutaneous Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale
    Hernandez-Enriquez, Marco
    Freixa, Xavier
    REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2014, 67 (08): : 603 - 607
  • [48] Patent Foramen Ovale Stroke and Device Closure
    Suradi, Hussam S.
    Hijazi, Ziyad M.
    CARDIOLOGY CLINICS, 2016, 34 (02) : 231 - +
  • [49] Updates on Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) Closure
    Voudris, Konstantinos V.
    Poulin, Marie-France
    Kavinsky, Clifford J.
    CURRENT CARDIOLOGY REPORTS, 2024, 26 (07) : 735 - 746
  • [50] Patent Foramen Ovale, Systemic Embolization, and Closure
    Holmes, David R., Jr.
    Cohen, Howard A.
    Ruiz, Carlos
    CURRENT PROBLEMS IN CARDIOLOGY, 2009, 34 (10) : 483 - 530