ASD Closure in Structural Heart Disease
- 160 Downloads
Purpose of Review
While the safety and efficacy of percutaneous ASD closure has been established, new data have recently emerged regarding the negative impact of residual iatrogenic ASD (iASD) following left heart structural interventions. Additionally, new devices with potential advantages have recently been studied. We will review here the potential indications for closure of iASD along with new generation closure devices and potential late complications requiring long-term follow-up.
With the expansion of left-heart structural interventions and large-bore transseptal access, there has been growing experience gained with management of residual iASD. Some recently published reports have implicated residual iASD after these procedures as a potential source of diminished clinical outcomes and mortality. Additionally, recent trials investigating new generation closure devices as well as expanding knowledge regarding late complications of percutaneous ASD closure have been published.
While percutaneous ASD closure is no longer a novel approach to managing septal defects, there are several contemporary issues related to residual iASD following large-bore transseptal access and new generation devices which serve as an impetus for this review. Ongoing attention to potential late complications and decreasing their incidence with ongoing study is clearly needed.
KeywordsAtrial septal defect (ASD) Iatrogenic ASD Septal defect closure Structural heart disease intervention Congenital heart disease
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Dominik M. Wiktor has no financial disclosures relevant to the subject matter of this publication.
John D. Carroll served on the steering committee for the clinical trial RESPECT sponsored by St. Jude Medical and Abbott Vascular. Compensation for consulting services rendered in this role was paid to University Physician Inc. of the University of Colorado School of Medicine.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 3.Warnes CA, Williams RG, Bashore TM, Child JS, Connolly HM, Dearani JA, et al. ACC/AHA 2008 guidelines for the management of adults with congenital heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Develop Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Congenital Heart Disease). Developed in Collaboration with the American Society of Echocardiography, Heart Rhythm Society, International Society for Adult Congenital Heart Disease, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(23):e143–263.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.• Schueler R, Öztürk C, Wedekind JA, Werner N, Stöckigt F, Mellert F, et al. Persistence of iatrogenic atrial septal defect after interventional mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system: a note of caution. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(3):450–9. This paper is one of the first to quantify the rates of persistent iASD following MitraClip and importantly characterizes the impact of persistent iASD on clinical outcomes including mortality CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.•• Turner, D.R., et al., Closure of secundum atrial septal defects with the AMPLATZER septal occluder: a prospective, multicenter, post-approval study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv, 2017. 10(8). This is a post-approval study which validates the previous experience with the AMPLATZER Septal Occluder and confirms its effectiveness and most importantly safety in large cohort of patients followed for 2 years following implantation. Google Scholar
- 9.Amin Z, Hijazi ZM, Bass JL, Cheatham JP, Hellenbrand WE, Kleinman CS. 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. 2004;63(4):496–502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Wilson W, Taubert KA, Gewitz M, Lockhart PB, Baddour LM, Levison M, et al. Prevention of infective endocarditis: guidelines from the American Heart Association: a guideline from the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group. Circulation. 2007;116(15):1736–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar