Bakar Shahrukh N, Burns Daniel J P, Diamantouros Pantelis, Sridhar Kumar, Kiaii Bob, Chu Michael W A
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Western University, Lawson Health Research Institute, 339 Windermere Road, London, ON, N6A 5A5, Canada.
Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Western University, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada.
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018 Jan 18;13(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s13019-018-0701-1.
Contemporary transcatheter and minimally invasive approaches allow for improved cosmesis and eliminate sternotomy; however, access to a 'Heart Team' approach to minimally invasive atrial septal defect (ASD) repair remains limited in Canada.
Retrospective chart review of all minimally invasive atrial septal defect repairs performed between 2009 and 2017 at a quaternary cardiac care centre were included. We compared residual shunt, functional status, periprocedural complications, and hospital lengths-of-stay between patients undergoing transcatheter and minimally invasive endoscopic ASD repair.
Between 2009 and 2017, 61 consecutive patients underwent ASD repair at a single centre: 28 patients underwent transcatheter closure (64.3% female; median age 57, interquartile range 43-70.5) and 33 patients underwent minimally invasive endoscopic repair (72.7% female; median age 37, interquartile range 24-50). Patient demographics were similar between the two groups with the exception of transcatheter patients having smaller defect size (1.65 cm versus 2.35 cm, p = 0.002). Procedural success was 93% (26/28) and 100% (33/33) for transcatheter and minimally invasive groups (p = 0.21), respectively. Periprocedural complications were similarly low between the two groups with the exception of longer hospital length-of-stay in the surgical patients (5 days vs 1 day, p < 0.0001). Over a follow-up period (transcatheter: 0.5-56.5 months, surgical: 0.25-89 months), there was no difference in residual shunt (14.3% versus 6.1%, p = 0.4) or NYHA I Functional Class (88.5% versus 96.9%, p = 0.21).
Transcatheter and minimally invasive approaches to ASD repair are safe and feasible in selected patients using a 'Heart Team' approach and represent attractive alternatives to median sternotomy.
当代经导管和微创方法可改善美观效果并避免开胸手术;然而,在加拿大,采用“心脏团队”方法进行微创房间隔缺损(ASD)修复的机会仍然有限。
对一家四级心脏护理中心在2009年至2017年间进行的所有微创房间隔缺损修复手术进行回顾性病历审查。我们比较了经导管和微创内镜ASD修复患者之间的残余分流、功能状态、围手术期并发症和住院时间。
2009年至2017年间,一家中心连续61例患者接受了ASD修复:28例患者接受经导管封堵(女性占64.3%;中位年龄57岁,四分位间距43 - 70.5岁),33例患者接受微创内镜修复(女性占72.7%;中位年龄37岁,四分位间距24 - 50岁)。除经导管治疗的患者缺损尺寸较小外(1.65厘米对2.35厘米,p = 0.002),两组患者的人口统计学特征相似。经导管组和微创组的手术成功率分别为93%(26/28)和100%(33/33)(p = 0.21)。两组围手术期并发症同样较低,但手术患者的住院时间较长(5天对1天,p < 0.0001)。在随访期内(经导管组:0.5 - 56.5个月,手术组:0.25 - 89个月),残余分流(14.3%对6.1%,p = 0.4)或纽约心脏协会(NYHA)I级功能分级(88.5%对96.9%,p = 0.21)无差异。
采用“心脏团队”方法,经导管和微创ASD修复方法在选定患者中是安全可行的,是正中开胸手术有吸引力的替代方法。