4.8 Article

Transcatheter device closure of congenital and postoperative residual ventricular septal defects

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 110, 期 5, 页码 501-507

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000137116.12176.A6

关键词

catheterization; heart septal defects; ventricles

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [T32 HL007572] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background - Our purpose was to describe a 13-year experience with patients undergoing transcatheter device closure of unrepaired congenital or postoperative residual ventricular septal defects (VSDs). Methods and Results - Since 1989, 170 patients (median age, 3.9 years) have undergone catheterization for closure of 1 or more congenital (n = 92) or postoperative (n = 78) residual VSDs using successive generations of STARFlex-type devices. Outcomes included echocardiographic assessment of residual flow and device position, assessment of VSD shunt/severity, and adverse events. Among 168 patients in whom device implantation was performed, between 1 and 7 devices were placed per patient (median, 1), with multiple devices placed in 40%. There was a significant decrease in left-to-right shunting after device implantation (P < 0.001) and significant improvement in VSD size/severity, and device position proved stable. Of 332 adverse events, 39 were related to the device and 261 were related to the catheterization; all but 5 occurred in the periprocedural period. At a median follow-up of 24 months (0 to 154 months), 14 patients had died and 18 had device(s) explanted. Conclusions - Congenital and postoperative VSD closure using STARFlex-type devices resulted in stable improvement in clinical status and decreased interventricular shunting. Although periprocedural events occurred frequently, late events caused by the device were rare. Transcatheter device closure is an effective management option for patients with complex muscular VSDs that are difficult to approach surgically and for postoperative residual VSDs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据