Andreescu Adriana, Mihaila Baldea Sorina, Udroiu Cristian, Badiu Catalin Constantin, Vinereanu Dragos
Department of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Emergency and University Hospital Bucharest, Splaiul Independentei no 169, sector 5, 050098 Bucharest, Romania.
University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, Dionisie Lupu no 37, Sector 2, 020021 Bucharest, Romania.
Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2025 May 12;9(5):ytaf189. doi: 10.1093/ehjcr/ytaf189. eCollection 2025 May.
Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is present in ∼20% of adults and is associated with cryptogenic stroke, recurrent transient neurological deficit, decompression illness, and migraines. In patients with high probability of a PFO-related ischaemic event, the preferred management strategy is the endovascular closure of the PFO, whenever feasible. Cardiac erosion or perforation is an unusual event after the interventional closure of a PFO, but its occurrence portends a life-threatening potential. Therefore, clinicians should be aware of this serious complication when faced with acute cardiac tamponade in a patient with a history of PFO closure.
We report the case of a 57-year-old man, with a recent PFO-related ischaemic stroke, who presented for elective endovascular closure of the PFO. Patent foramen ovale and surrounding structures seemed amenable for closure, and recommended a 25-mm Amplatzer device. Isolated dilation of the aortic bulb was noted by transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE), but with normal valve morphology and no aortic regurgitation. The procedure was performed without complications, and 24 h echo follow-up showed no impingement of the device on the surrounding structures. However, 36 h after the procedure, the patient developed sudden chest pain and cardiac tamponade. Emergency cardiac surgery with intra-operative TEE guidance revealed right atrial and aortic bulb perforation caused by the larger right disc of the occluder. The device was removed, and the defects were sutured. The patient was discharged within 14 days after the event, with no further complications.
Perforation of the aortic root is a very rare complication after interventional PFO closure. This complication usually occurs at a long distance after the procedure, and is associated with oversized devices, deficient or absent aortic rim, or misalignment of the defect with the aorta. Our patient presented none of the above, but a moderate dilation of the aortic bulb, which might have triggered the rapid erosion and perforation.
卵圆孔未闭(PFO)在约20%的成年人中存在,与不明原因卒中、复发性短暂性神经功能缺损、减压病和偏头痛有关。在PFO相关缺血事件可能性高的患者中,只要可行,首选的治疗策略是PFO的血管内封堵。心脏侵蚀或穿孔是PFO介入封堵术后的罕见事件,但其发生预示着潜在的生命威胁。因此,临床医生在面对有PFO封堵病史的患者发生急性心脏压塞时,应意识到这一严重并发症。
我们报告一例57岁男性病例,近期发生与PFO相关的缺血性卒中,前来接受PFO的择期血管内封堵。卵圆孔未闭及周围结构似乎适合封堵,推荐使用25mm的Amplatzer装置。经食管超声心动图(TEE)发现主动脉球囊孤立性扩张,但瓣膜形态正常且无主动脉瓣反流。手术过程顺利,无并发症,术后24小时超声心动图随访显示装置未对周围结构造成压迫。然而,术后36小时,患者突发胸痛和心脏压塞。在术中TEE引导下进行的急诊心脏手术显示,封堵器较大的右盘片导致右心房和主动脉球囊穿孔。取出装置,缝合缺损。患者在事件发生后14天内出院,无进一步并发症。
主动脉根部穿孔是PFO介入封堵术后极为罕见的并发症。这种并发症通常在术后很长时间发生,与装置尺寸过大、主动脉边缘不足或缺失、或缺损与主动脉未对齐有关。我们的患者不存在上述情况,但有主动脉球囊中度扩张,这可能引发了快速的侵蚀和穿孔。