Qiu Han-Fan, Chen Qiang, Hong Zhi-Nuan, Chen Liang-Wan, Huang Xue-Shan
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, People's Republic of China.
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Jul 19;14(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s13019-019-0957-0.
Transcatheter and intraoperative device closure for atrial septal defect (ASD) are widely applied to reduce the incision size and the potential for injury during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) in conventional surgical repair. No studies had been conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of these three treatments.
From January 2018 to April 2018, 87 patients with an isolated ASD who had undergone transcatheter device closure (n = 45), intraoperative device closure (n = 22) and surgical repair (n = 20) were retrospectively reviewed and further analyzed to compare these three treatments.
The successful closure rate was similar in the three groups. There was a significant difference in aortic cross-clamping time, CPB duration and operative time between the surgical group and the device groups. The length of intensive care unit stay, postoperative mechanical ventilation time and length of hospital stay were shorter in the two device groups than in the surgical group. The incision was the most extended in the surgical group. Regarding major adverse events, no significant differences were found among the three groups.
Transcatheter and intraoperative device closure and surgical repair for ASD are all safe and effective. Considering their respective disadvantages and advantages, the transcatheter approach may be the first choice for an isolated secundum ASD, the intraoperative approach may be the second choice, and surgical repair may be the last resort.
经导管和术中封堵器闭合房间隔缺损(ASD)被广泛应用,以减小传统外科修复中体外循环(CPB)期间的切口大小和受伤可能性。尚未有研究对这三种治疗方法的安全性和有效性进行比较。
回顾性分析2018年1月至2018年4月期间87例孤立性ASD患者,这些患者分别接受了经导管封堵器闭合术(n = 45)、术中封堵器闭合术(n = 22)和外科修复术(n = 20),并进一步比较这三种治疗方法。
三组的成功闭合率相似。手术组与封堵器组在主动脉阻断时间、CPB持续时间和手术时间方面存在显著差异。两个封堵器组的重症监护病房停留时间、术后机械通气时间和住院时间均短于手术组。手术组的切口最长。关于主要不良事件,三组之间未发现显著差异。
ASD的经导管和术中封堵器闭合术以及外科修复术均安全有效。考虑到它们各自的优缺点,经导管方法可能是孤立性继发孔型ASD的首选,术中方法可能是次选,而外科修复可能是最后的选择。