Long-term transesophageal echocardiography after patent foramen ovale closure by BioSTAR and Amplatzer patent foramen ovale occluders.
Absorbable Implants
Adult
Cardiac Catheterization
/ adverse effects
Echocardiography, Doppler, Color
Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional
Echocardiography, Transesophageal
Female
Foramen Ovale, Patent
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Predictive Value of Tests
Prosthesis Design
Septal Occluder Device
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
metal frame protrusion
residual shunt
Journal
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 02 2020
15 02 2020
Historique:
received:
13
11
2018
revised:
29
03
2019
accepted:
16
05
2019
pubmed:
28
5
2019
medline:
29
9
2020
entrez:
28
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare transesophageal echocardiography (TOE) findings after patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure by BioSTAR (NMT Medical Inc, Boston, MA) and Amplatzer PFO occluders (Abbott Vascular, Plymouth, MN). PFO closure with a biodegradable device represents an attractive alternative to permanent devices. Long-term effectiveness and morphology after biodegradation remain unknown. Between February 2008 and June 2014, 49 patients received BioSTAR and 48 Amplatzer PFO occluder. TOE was performed after closure, at 6 months and beyond 2 years. PFO features were comparable between the groups. Immediate effective closure (<5 bubbles on Valsalva) was obtained in 96% by BioSTAR and 88% by Amplatzer PFO occluder (p = .16). Except for transient fever after BioSTAR (10.8 vs. 0%; p = .08), there was no adverse events. TOE at 6 months revealed comparable effective closure (93 vs. 89%; p = .74), all devices in correct position and no thrombus/pericardial effusion. In the BioSTAR group, a peri-device left-to-right color Doppler shunt was documented in one patient (2.2%), protrusion of the nitinol framework strut(s) into the atrial cavity in two patients (4.3%), and both events in one patient (2.2%). TOE beyond 2 years showed comparable effective closure (92 vs. 96%; p = 1.00) and again BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion. There was no stroke or peripheral embolization in either group while TIA was numerically greater in BioSTAR patients (6.8 vs. 2.5%; p = .61). BioSTAR provided similar PFO closure rate as Amplatzer PFO occluder. As yet unreported BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion may have practical implications for further development of biodegradable devices.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVES
To compare transesophageal echocardiography (TOE) findings after patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure by BioSTAR (NMT Medical Inc, Boston, MA) and Amplatzer PFO occluders (Abbott Vascular, Plymouth, MN).
BACKGROUND
PFO closure with a biodegradable device represents an attractive alternative to permanent devices. Long-term effectiveness and morphology after biodegradation remain unknown.
METHODS
Between February 2008 and June 2014, 49 patients received BioSTAR and 48 Amplatzer PFO occluder. TOE was performed after closure, at 6 months and beyond 2 years.
RESULTS
PFO features were comparable between the groups. Immediate effective closure (<5 bubbles on Valsalva) was obtained in 96% by BioSTAR and 88% by Amplatzer PFO occluder (p = .16). Except for transient fever after BioSTAR (10.8 vs. 0%; p = .08), there was no adverse events. TOE at 6 months revealed comparable effective closure (93 vs. 89%; p = .74), all devices in correct position and no thrombus/pericardial effusion. In the BioSTAR group, a peri-device left-to-right color Doppler shunt was documented in one patient (2.2%), protrusion of the nitinol framework strut(s) into the atrial cavity in two patients (4.3%), and both events in one patient (2.2%). TOE beyond 2 years showed comparable effective closure (92 vs. 96%; p = 1.00) and again BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion. There was no stroke or peripheral embolization in either group while TIA was numerically greater in BioSTAR patients (6.8 vs. 2.5%; p = .61).
CONCLUSION
BioSTAR provided similar PFO closure rate as Amplatzer PFO occluder. As yet unreported BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion may have practical implications for further development of biodegradable devices.
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
349-354Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Meier B, Kalesan B, Mattle HP, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic embolism. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1083-1091. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1211716.
Carroll JD, Saver JL, Thaler DE, et al. Closure of patent foramen ovale versus medical therapy after cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:1092-1100. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1301440.
Khairy P, O'Donnell CP, Landzberg MJ. Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and presumed paradoxical thromboemboli: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:753-760.
Wahl A, Kunz M, Moschovitis A, et al. Long-term results after fluoroscopy-guided closure of patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of paradoxical embolism. Heart. 2008;94:336-341. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2007.118505.
Ussia GP, Cammalleri V, Mulè M, et al. Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale with a bioabsorbable occluder device. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74:607-614. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.22033.
Mullen MJ, Hildick-Smith D, De GJV, et al. BioSTAR evaluation STudy (BEST): a prospective, multicenter, phase I clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of the BioSTAR bioabsorbable septal repair implant for the closure of atrial-level shunts. Circulation. 2006;114:1962-1967. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.664672.
Van den BBJ, Post MC, Plokker HW, ten BJM, Suttorp MJ. Patent foramen ovale closure using a bioabsorbable closure device: safety and efficacy at 6-month follow-up. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:968-973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.06.012.
Darsaklis K, Freixa X, Asgar A, et al. A novel system for transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale: clinical and echocardiographic outcome comparison with other contemporary devices. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30:639-646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2014.03.015.
Vottero GV, Niclauss L, Marcucci C, Hurni M, Segesser LK v. Late migration of percutaneous bio-absorbable devices-a word of caution. J Card Surg. 2012;27:183-185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8191.2011.01357.x.
Happel CM, Laser KT, Sigler M, Kececioglu D, Sandica E, Haas NA. Single center experience: implantation failures, early, and late complications after implantation of a partially biodegradable ASD/PFO-device (BioStar®). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85:990-997. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25783.
Noc M, Cernic Suligoj N, Zvan B, Zorc M, Kar S. In-tunnel closure of patent foramen ovale with a FlatStent EF™. Kardiol Pol. 2015;73:549-556. https://doi.org/10.5603/KP.a2015.0026.
Heinisch C, Bertog S, Wunderlich N, et al. Percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ovale using the HELEX® Septal Occluder: acute and long-term results in 405 patients. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:717-723. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV8I6A111.
Sievert H, Wunderlich N, Reiffenstein I, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Coherex FlatStent™ and FlatStent™ EF PFO closure system for in-tunnel PFO closure: results of the Coherex-EU study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83:1135-1143. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.24565.
Giardina A, Gioffre G, Iamele M, et al. Amplatzer patent foramen ovale occluder vs. bioabsorbable device biostar for patent foramen ovale closure: safety and efficacy at 12-month follow up. EuroIntervention. 2011;7. https://www.pcronline.com/eurointervention/M_issue/volume-7/supplement-m/408/amplatzer-patent-foramen-ovale-occluder-vs-bioabsorbable-device-biostar-for-patent-foramen-ovale-closure-safety-and-efficacy-at-12-month-follow-up.html: Accessed August 23, 2018.
Van den BBJ, Luermans JG, Post MC, Plokker HW, Ten BJM, Suttorp MJ. The BioSTAR(r) device versus the CardioSEAL(r) device in patent foramen ovale closure: comparison of mid-term efficacy and safety. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:498-504. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ30V6I4A83.
Merkler AE, Gialdini G, Yaghi S, et al. Safety outcomes after percutaneous transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale. Stroke. 2017;48(11):3073-3077.