Korean Circ J.  2019 Apr;49(4):326-335. 10.4070/kcj.2018.0278.

Early to Mid-Term Follow-Up Outcomes of Percutaneous Closure of Atrial Septal Defects Using Recent Generation Devices: a Single-Center Experience

• Kim AY
• Jung SY
• Chang JY
• Jung JW
• Choi JY

• KMID: 2441135
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2018.0278

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to describe our early to mid-term experience with transcatheter atrial septal defect (ASD) closure using the Occlutech Figulla® Flex II device (FSO), Gore® Cardioform septal occluder (GSO), and Amplatzer® septal occluder (ASO) after they were first approved in Korea in 2014, and to compare the three aforementioned kinds of ASD closure devices.
METHODS
Between September 2014 and August 2016, 267 patients underwent transcatheter ASD closure in our institution. Baseline characteristics, hemodynamic features, comorbidities, and procedural success and complication rates were analyzed retrospectively. The unpaired Student t-test or variance analysis was used in the statistical analysis.
RESULTS
The FSO was most commonly used (n=152, 56.9%), followed by the ASO (n=98, 36.7%) and GSO (n=17, 6.4%). Baseline characteristics and hemodynamic features were similar between the devices, except that the defect size and pulmonary flow-to-systemic flow ratio were lower in the GSO group than in the other groups. Overall, the procedural success rate remained at 100%, and major complication rate was < 1%. No late complication occurred during the follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
The FSO and GSO are feasible, safe options for use in transcatheter ASD closure, and they are comparable to the ASO.

Keyword

Congenital heart defects; Atrial septal defects; Septal occluder device; Cardiac catheterization

MeSH Terms

Cardiac Catheterization
Comorbidity
Follow-Up Studies*
Heart Defects, Congenital
Heart Septal Defects, Atrial*
Hemodynamics
Humans
Korea
Retrospective Studies
Septal Occluder Device

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Devices used for atrial septal defect closure. (A) Amplatzer® septal occluder; (B) Occlutech Figulla® Flex II; (C) Gore® septal occluder.

Reference

1. Berger F, Vogel M, Alexi-Meskishvili V, Lange PE. Comparison of results and complications of surgical and Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defects. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999; 118:674–678.

2. Butera G, Romagnoli E, Carminati M, et al. Treatment of isolated secundum atrial septal defects: impact of age and defect morphology in 1,013 consecutive patients. Am Heart J. 2008; 156:706–712.

3. Grohmann J, Wildberg C, Zartner P, et al. Multicenter midterm follow-up results using the gore septal occluder for atrial septal defect closure in pediatric patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 89:E226–E232.

4. Nassif M, Abdelghani M, Bouma BJ, et al. Historical developments of atrial septal defect closure devices: what we learn from the past. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2016; 13:555–568.

5. Halabi A, Hijazi ZM. A new device to close secundum atrial septal defects: first clinical use to close multiple defects in a child. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008; 71:853–856.

6. Pac A, Polat TB, Cetin I, Oflaz MB, Balli S. Figulla ASD occluder versus Amplatzer septal occluder: a comparative study on validation of a novel device for percutaneous closure of atrial septal defects. J Interv Cardiol. 2009; 22:489–495.

7. Ilkay E, Kaçmaz F, Ozeke O, et al. The efficiency and safety of percutaneous closure of secundum atrial septal defects with the Occlutech Figulla device: initial clinical experience. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2010; 38:189–193.

8. Aytemir K, Oto A, Ozkutlu S, et al. Early-mid term follow-up results of percutaneous closure of the interatrial septal defects with occlutech figulla devices: a single center experience. J Interv Cardiol. 2012; 25:375–381.

9. Cansel M, Pekdemir H, Yağmur J, et al. Early single clinical experience with the new Figulla ASD occluder for transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect in adults. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2011; 104:155–160.

10. Baumgartner H, Bonhoeffer P, De Groot NM, et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of grown-up congenital heart disease (new version 2010). Eur Heart J. 2010; 31:2915–2957.

11. Jung SY, Choi JY. Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect: principles and available devices. J Thorac Dis. 2018; 10:Suppl 24. S2909–S2922.

12. Mathewson JW, Bichell D, Rothman A, Ing FF. Absent posteroinferior and anterosuperior atrial septal defect rims: factors affecting nonsurgical closure of large secundum defects using the Amplatzer occluder. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2004; 17:62–69.

13. Crawford GB, Brindis RG, Krucoff MW, Mansalis BP, Carroll JD. Percutaneous atrial septal occluder devices and cardiac erosion: a review of the literature. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012; 80:157–167.

14. Godart F, Houeijeh A, Recher M, et al. Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect with the Figulla^® ASD occluder: a comparative study with the Amplatzer^® septal occluder. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2015; 108:57–63.

15. Medford BA, Taggart NW, Cabalka AK, et al. Intracardiac echocardiography during atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale device closure in pediatric and adolescent patients. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014; 27:984–990.

16. Amin Z, Hijazi ZM, Bass JL, Cheatham JP, Hellenbrand WE, Kleinman CS. Erosion of Amplatzer septal occluder device after closure of secundum atrial septal defects: review of registry of complications and recommendations to minimize future risk. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004; 63:496–502.

17. Mitchelson B, O'Donnell C, Ruygrok P, Wright J, Stirling J, Wilson N. Transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defects: has fear of device erosion altered outcomes? Cardiol Young. 2017; 27:1153–1161.

18. McElhinney DB, Quartermain MD, Kenny D, Alboliras E, Amin Z. Relative risk factors for cardiac erosion following transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects: a case-control study. Circulation. 2016; 133:1738–1746.

19. Haas NA, Soetemann DB, Ates I, et al. Closure of secundum atrial septal defects by using the occlutech occluder devices in more than 1300 patients: the IRFACODE Project: a retrospective case series. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 88:571–581.

20. Roymanee S, Promphan W, Tonklang N, Wongwaitaweewong K. Comparison of the Occlutech^® Figulla^® septal occluder and Amplatzer^® septal occluder for atrial septal defect device closure. Pediatr Cardiol. 2015; 36:935–941.

21. Haas NA, Happel CM, Soetemann DB, et al. Optimal septum alignment of the Figulla Flex occluder to the atrial septum in patients with secundum atrial septal defects. EuroIntervention. 2016; 11:1153–1160.

22. O'Byrne ML, Gillespie MJ, Kennedy KF, Dori Y, Rome JJ, Glatz AC. The influence of deficient retro-aortic rim on technical success and early adverse events following device closure of secundum atrial septal defects: an Analysis of the IMPACT Registry^®. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 89:102–111.

23. Grohmann J, Höhn R, Fleck T, Schmoor C, Stiller B. Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects in children and adolescents: single-center experience with the GORE^® septal occluder. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 84:E51–E57.

24. Søndergaard L, Loh PH, Franzen O, Ihlemann N, Vejlstrup N. The first clinical experience with the new GORE^® septal occluder (GSO). EuroIntervention. 2013; 9:959–963.

25. Smith B, Thomson J, Crossland D, Spence MS, Morgan GJ. UK multicenter experience using the Gore septal occluder (GSO™) for atrial septal defect closure in children and adults. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 83:581–586.