Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Figulla ASD Occluder versus Amplatzer Septal Occluder: A Comparative Study on Validation of a Novel Device for Percutaneous Closure of Atrial Septal Defects

Figulla ASD Occluder versus Amplatzer Septal Occluder: A Comparative Study on Validation of a... Objectives: Occlutech Figulla ASD Occluder (FSO) is an alternative device to Amplatzer Septal Occluder (ASO) with some structural innovations including increased flexibility, minimizing the amount of material implanted, and absence of the left atrial clamp. We aimed to report our experiences with FSO and compare the outcomes of this novel device versus ASO. Interventions: Between December 2005 and February 2009, 75 patients diagnosed with secundum atrial septal defects underwent transcatheter closure. The FSO device was used in 33 patients, and the ASO was used in 42. Results: Patient characteristics, stretch size of the defect, device left disc size, procedure, and fluoroscopy time were similar between the groups. However, the difference between device waist size and stretched diameter of the defect was significantly higher, and device delivery sheath was significantly larger in FSO group and device left disc size was significantly lower in the FSO group. In all subjects, the residual shunt was small to trivial during follow‐up and the reduction in prevalence of residual shunt with time was similar in both groups (P = 0.68). We found no differences in complication rate between the two devices; however, device embolization to the pulmonary bifurcation in one patient was recorded as major complication in FSO device group. Conclusions: Both devices are clinically safe and effective in ASD closure. FSO device has similar outcomes when compared to ASO device. Difficulties in selecting the correct device size in larger defects and larger venous sheath requirement need to be evaluated in further studies. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Interventional Cardiology Wiley

Figulla ASD Occluder versus Amplatzer Septal Occluder: A Comparative Study on Validation of a Novel Device for Percutaneous Closure of Atrial Septal Defects

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/figulla-asd-occluder-versus-amplatzer-septal-occluder-a-comparative-rkulYU1FUs

References (23)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
©2009, the Authors Journal compilation ©2009, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
ISSN
0896-4327
eISSN
1540-8183
DOI
10.1111/j.1540-8183.2009.00497.x
pmid
19735475
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Objectives: Occlutech Figulla ASD Occluder (FSO) is an alternative device to Amplatzer Septal Occluder (ASO) with some structural innovations including increased flexibility, minimizing the amount of material implanted, and absence of the left atrial clamp. We aimed to report our experiences with FSO and compare the outcomes of this novel device versus ASO. Interventions: Between December 2005 and February 2009, 75 patients diagnosed with secundum atrial septal defects underwent transcatheter closure. The FSO device was used in 33 patients, and the ASO was used in 42. Results: Patient characteristics, stretch size of the defect, device left disc size, procedure, and fluoroscopy time were similar between the groups. However, the difference between device waist size and stretched diameter of the defect was significantly higher, and device delivery sheath was significantly larger in FSO group and device left disc size was significantly lower in the FSO group. In all subjects, the residual shunt was small to trivial during follow‐up and the reduction in prevalence of residual shunt with time was similar in both groups (P = 0.68). We found no differences in complication rate between the two devices; however, device embolization to the pulmonary bifurcation in one patient was recorded as major complication in FSO device group. Conclusions: Both devices are clinically safe and effective in ASD closure. FSO device has similar outcomes when compared to ASO device. Difficulties in selecting the correct device size in larger defects and larger venous sheath requirement need to be evaluated in further studies.

Journal

Journal of Interventional CardiologyWiley

Published: Dec 1, 2009

There are no references for this article.