Comparative clinical study of percutaneous and peratrial device closure of secundum atrial septal defects under single transesophageal echocardiographic guidance
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-4497.2014.08.005
- VernacularTitle:单纯超声引导下经皮与经胸房间隔缺损封堵术的疗效
- Author:
Xiaobo GUO
;
Hongxin LI
;
Wenbin GUO
;
Chengwei ZOU
;
Wenlong ZHANG
;
Zhengjun WANG
;
Fei LIANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Atrial septal defect;
Echocardiography,transesophageal;
Minimally invasive surgery;
Percutaneous
- From:
Chinese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2014;30(8):463-466
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective This study is to evaluate the advantages between percutaneous and peratrial device closure of secundum atrial septal defects(ASD) under single transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance.Methods From December 2010 to December 2012,53 patients with the ASD of≤25 mm in diameter underwent percutaneous device closure under simple TEE guidance(the percutaneous group).The device was implanted through the femoral vascular access.Fifty patients with similar age and similar-sized ASD to the percutaneous group,were selected from 350 consecutive patients who underwent peratrial device closure of ASD and assigned to the peratrial group.The ASDs were occluded through a right minithoracotomy approach.The success rate,intracardiac manipulation time,procedural time,postoperative stay and the follow-up results were recorded.Results When the maximum diameter of ASD was ＜ 20 mm,the success rate of both groups was 100％.When the ASD diameter was 20 mm but 25 mm,the success rate was 84％ in the percutaneous group and 100％ in the peratrial group.Three patients failed in the percutaneous group with the ASD diameter of 20 mm and the aortic rim of 3 mm.They were successfully converted to peratrial device closure.The average intrcardiac manipulation time was(20±7) minutes in the percutaneous group and (5 ± 6) minutes in the peratrial group(P ＜ 0.05).The average procedure time was(24 ± 7) minutes in the percutaneous group and (39 ± 6) minutes in the peratrial group(P ＜ 0.05).The postoperative hospital stay was (3.0 ± 0.8) days in the percutaneous group and(4.7 ± 1.5) days in the peratrial group(P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion The percutaneous device closure of ASD under simple TEE guidance is feasible,safe,and efficacious in patients with the ASD diameter of ≤25 mm.It has the advantages of less trauma,less procedural time,shorter hospital stay and better cosmetic results.However,when the ASD diameter was 20 mm and the aortic rim was 3 mm,the peratrial approach may be a better choice.
