Department of Congenital Heart Diseases and Paediatric Cardiology in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.
Kardiol Pol. 2012;70(11):1142-6.
The use of an Amplatzer Cribriform Septal Occluder (ACSO) for percutaneous patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure (especially in cases with atrial septal aneurysm) has been recently described as superior compared to that of an Amplatzer PFO Occluder (APFO).
To assess immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes of patients with PFO with paradoxical embolism event (EE) who underwent transcatheter PFO closure with an APFO or an ACSO.
Overall, 56 consecutive patients underwent percutaneous closure of PFO with an APFO device; the results were compared to those in seven patients treated with ACSO. Deaths due to embolism, stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) were considered recurrent EE. Pre- and 6 month post-intervention right to left shunting (RLS) were evaluated with intravenous contrast injection by transcranial Doppler examination of the middle cerebral artery during Valsalva manoeuvre.
The procedure was successfully completed in all patients in both groups. No procedure-related complications were observed during hospitalisation. Residual RLS was noted at six months in 14/56 (25%) patients in the APFO group and 4/7 (57%) patients in the ACSO group (p <0.05). Recurrent TIA was observed in three patients in the APFO group (one of them had small residual shunt immediately after procedure and at six-month follow-up). Another patient from that group experienced stroke one month after the procedure. No recurrence of EE was recorded in the ACSO group.
Transcatheter PFO closure with both Amplatzer devices is a minimally invasive procedure with high success and low complication rates. Taking in consideration residual RLS in the medium-term period, the application of a Cribriform device is not superior to that of an Amplatzer PFO device. Results of randomised trials are necessary to confirm the effectiveness of transcatheter therapy in patients with PFO and a paradoxical thromboembolic event.
与 Amplatzer PFO 封堵器(APFO)相比,使用 Amplatzer 筛状隔瓣封堵器(ACSO)经皮封堵卵圆孔未闭(PFO)(尤其是在合并房间隔瘤的情况下)的效果更佳。
评估接受 APFO 或 ACSO 行经皮 PFO 封堵术的伴有反常栓塞事件(EE)的 PFO 患者的即刻和中期临床结局。
共有 56 例连续患者接受了 APFO 装置经皮 PFO 封堵术;结果与 7 例接受 ACSO 治疗的患者进行了比较。栓塞、卒中和短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)导致的死亡被认为是复发的 EE。在介入前和介入后 6 个月,通过经颅多普勒超声检查大脑中动脉在valsalva 动作期间行静脉内对比剂注射,评估右向左分流(RLS)。
两组患者的手术均成功完成。在住院期间未观察到与操作相关的并发症。APFO 组有 14/56(25%)例患者在 6 个月时仍存在残余 RLS,ACSO 组有 4/7(57%)例患者存在残余 RLS(p<0.05)。APFO 组有 3 例患者出现 TIA 复发(其中 1 例在术后即刻和 6 个月随访时仍存在小残余分流)。该组的另一名患者在术后 1 个月发生了卒。在 ACSO 组未记录到 EE 复发。
使用两种 Amplatzer 装置行经皮 PFO 封堵术是一种微创、成功率高且并发症发生率低的手术。考虑到中期的残余 RLS,筛状装置的应用并不优于 Amplatzer PFO 装置。需要随机试验的结果来证实经导管治疗 PFO 合并反常血栓栓塞事件患者的有效性。