Introduction: Although multiple defects of the atrial septum are not uncommon, there remain limited data regarding the use of multiple devices in these patients. A variety of approaches to transcatheter closure have b...Introduction: Although multiple defects of the atrial septum are not uncommon, there remain limited data regarding the use of multiple devices in these patients. A variety of approaches to transcatheter closure have been used, and in this paper we describe the experience from two operators in a single centre. Methods: From September 2002 to September 2012, 673 transcatheter atrial septal defects (ASD) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure procedures were performed and retrospectively examined in a registry analysis. Results: Of these, 22 patients had multiple discrete defects, and four different approaches to closure were used. In 4 patients (18.2%) one device was used percutaneously to close multiple defects. Eleven patients (50%) had two devices inserted during the same procedure while two patients (9%) had two devices inserted as staged procedures. One patient (4.5%) had three devices inserted over two procedures. Four patients (18.2%) were found not to be suitable for percutaneous closure during the procedure and were referred for surgical closure. Conclusion: Our experience with the implant procedures, and clinical follow up of patients, shows that patients with multiple defects can be effectively treated with transcatheter device techniques including single device closure, multiple devices in one procedure and multiple devices in staged procedures and also with surgical repair.展开更多
文摘Introduction: Although multiple defects of the atrial septum are not uncommon, there remain limited data regarding the use of multiple devices in these patients. A variety of approaches to transcatheter closure have been used, and in this paper we describe the experience from two operators in a single centre. Methods: From September 2002 to September 2012, 673 transcatheter atrial septal defects (ASD) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure procedures were performed and retrospectively examined in a registry analysis. Results: Of these, 22 patients had multiple discrete defects, and four different approaches to closure were used. In 4 patients (18.2%) one device was used percutaneously to close multiple defects. Eleven patients (50%) had two devices inserted during the same procedure while two patients (9%) had two devices inserted as staged procedures. One patient (4.5%) had three devices inserted over two procedures. Four patients (18.2%) were found not to be suitable for percutaneous closure during the procedure and were referred for surgical closure. Conclusion: Our experience with the implant procedures, and clinical follow up of patients, shows that patients with multiple defects can be effectively treated with transcatheter device techniques including single device closure, multiple devices in one procedure and multiple devices in staged procedures and also with surgical repair.
