Clinical Research in Cardiology

, Volume 107, Issue 6, pp 527–529 | Cite as

Very late erosion of Amplatzer occluder device resulting in Cardiac tamponade after 15 years

  • Jan-Erik Guelker
  • Ruben Jansen
  • Kolja Sievert
  • Horst Sievert
  • Stefan Bertog
Letter to the Editors


Transcatheter atrial septal defect (ASD) closure is an alternative to surgical closure [1]. Though the immediate procedural risk is lower compared with surgery, atrial tachyarrhythmias, endocarditis and device-associated thrombus formation can occur [2, 3, 4, 5]. A very serious complication is device erosion or cardiac perforation. Potential risk factors are aortic rim deficiency and/or device oversizing causing flaring of the device around the aortic root or exertion of pressure (e.g. to the atrial roof) or undersizing causing protrusion of the left atrial disk into the aortic root [6, 7, 8]. Erosions typically occur early but cases up to 8 years after device implantation have been described [13]. We report a case of erosion causing pericardial tamponade 15 years after device implantation.

We report a case of a 35-year-old woman underwent closure of a large secundum-type ASD. The procedure was performed in 2001 without complications. Unfortunately, intra-procedural images are no...




Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Jan-Erik Guelker: none. Ruben Jansen: none. Kolja Sievert none. Horst Sievert: Study honorary, travel expenses, consulting fees from 4tech Cardio, Abbott Vascular, Ablative Solutions, Ancora Heart, Bavaria Medicine Technologie GmbH, Bioventrix, Boston Scientific, Carag, Cardiac Dimensions, Celenova, Cibiem, CGuard, Comed B.V., Contego, CVRx, Edwards, Endologix, Hemoteq, InspireMD, Lifetech, Maquet Getinge Group, Medtronic, Mitralign, Occlutech, pfm Medical, Recor, Renal Guard, Rox Medical, Terumo, Vascular Dynamics, Venus, Veryan. Stefan Bertog: none.


  1. 1.
    King TD, Thompson SL, Steiner C, Mills NL (1976) Secundum atrial septal defect. Nonoperative closure during cardiac catheterization. JAMA 235:2506–2509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berger F, Vogel M, Alexi-Meskishvili V, Lange PE (1999) Comparison of results and complications of surgical and Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defects. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 118:674–678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moore J, Hegde S, El-Said H, Beekman R 3rd, Benson L, Bergersen L, Holzer R, Jenkins K, Ringel R, Rome J, Vincent R, Martin G, for the ACC IMPACT Steering Committee (2013) Transcatheter device closure of atrial septal defects: a safety review. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 6:433–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    U.S. FDA (2012) FDA Executive Summary Memorandum—May 24, 2012: Circulatory system advisory panel meeting—transcatheter ASD occluders: clinical update and review of events [pdf]. Accessed 24 May 2012
  5. 5.
    Krumsdorf U, Ostermayer S, Billinger K, Trepels T, Zadan E, Horvath K, Sievert H (2004) Incidence and clinical course of thrombus formation on atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale closure devices in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 43:302–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McElhinney DB, Quartermain MD, Kenny D, Alboliras E, Amin Z (2016) Relative risk factors for cardiac erosion following transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects: a case-control study. Circulation 133(18):1738–1746CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amin Z, Hijazi ZM, Bass JL, Cheatham JP, Hellenbrand WE, Kleinman CS (2004) Erosion of Amplatzer septal occluder device after closure of secundum atrial septal defects: review of registry of complications and recommendations to minimize future risk. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 63(4):496–502CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    El-Said HG, Moore JW (2009) Erosion by the Amplatzer septal occluder: experienced operator opinions at odds with manufacturer recommendations? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 73(7):925–930CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baumgartner H, Bonhoeffer P, De Groot NMS et al (2010) ESC Guidelines for the management of grown-up congenital heart disease (new version 2010). Eur Heart J 31:2915–2957CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Butera G, Carminati M, Chessa M, Youssef R, Drago M, Giamberti A, Pome` G, Bossone E, Frigiola A (2006) Percutaneous versus surgical closure of secundum atrial septal defect: comparison of early results and complications. Am Heart J 151:228–234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fischer G, Stieh J, Uebing A, Hoffmann U, Morf G, Kramer HH (2003) Experience with transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defects using the Amplatzer septal occluder: a single centre study in 236 consecutive patients. Heart 89:199–204CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Du ZD, Hijazi ZM, Kleinman CS, Silverman NH, Larntz K (2002) Comparison between transcatheter and surgical closure of secundum atrial septal defect in children and adults: results of a multicenter nonrandomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:1836–1844CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roberts WT, Parmar J, Rajathurai T (2013) Very late erosion of Amplatzer septal occludedevice presenting as pericardial pain and effusion 8 years after placement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 82:E592–E594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Amin Z (2014) Echocardiographic predictors of cardiac erosion after Amplatzer septal occluder placement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 83(1):84–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Heartcentre Niederrhein, Department of CardiologyHelios Clinic KrefeldKrefeldGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Heart and Circulation ResearchUniversity CologneCologneGermany
  3. 3.CardioVascular Center FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations