Transesophageal echocardiography-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided patent foramen ovale closure A single center registry /

Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is conventionally performed under continuous transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance. We aimed to evaluate whether a simplified procedural approach, including pure fluoroscopy-guidance and final TEE control, as well as an aimed 'next-d...

Teljes leírás

Elmentve itt :
Bibliográfiai részletek
Szerzők: Achim Alexandru
Hochegger Paul
Kanoun Schnur Sadeek S
Moser Lisa
Stark Cosima
Pranevicius Robertas
Prunea Dan
Schmidt Albrecht
Ablasser Klemens
Verheyen Nicolas
Kolesnik Ewald
Maier Robert
Luha Olev
Ruzsa Zoltán
Zirlik Andreas
Tóth Gábor G.
Dokumentumtípus: Cikk
Megjelent: 2023
Sorozat:ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY-A JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ULTRASOUND AND ALLIED TECHNIQUES 40 No. 7
Tárgyszavak:
doi:10.1111/echo.15630

mtmt:34037533
Online Access:http://publicatio.bibl.u-szeged.hu/27720
Leíró adatok
Tartalmi kivonat:Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is conventionally performed under continuous transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance. We aimed to evaluate whether a simplified procedural approach, including pure fluoroscopy-guidance and final TEE control, as well as an aimed 'next-day-discharge' is comparable with the conventional TEE-guided procedure in terms of periprocedural and intermediate-term outcomes.All patients who underwent a PFO closure at our center between 2010 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Prior to June 2019 cases were performed with continuous TEE guidance (TEE-guided group). Since June 2019, only pure fluoroscopy-guided PFO closures have been performed with TEE insertion and control just prior to device release (fluoroscopy-guided group). We analyzed procedural aspects, as well as long term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.In total 291 patients were included in the analysis: 197 in the TEE-guided group and 94 in the fluoroscopy-guided group. Fluoroscopy-guided procedures were markedly shorter (48 ± 20 min vs. 25 ± 9 min; p < .01). There was no difference in procedural complications, including death, major bleeding, device dislodgement, stroke or clinically relevant peripheral embolization between the two groups (.5% vs. 0%; p = .99). Hospital stay was also shorter with the simplified approach (2.5 ± 1.6 vs. 3.5 ± 1.2 days; p < .01), allowing 85% same-day discharges during the last 12 months of observation period. At 6 ± 3 months echocardiographic follow-up a residual leakage was described in 8% of the TEE-guided cases and 2% of the fluoroscopy-guided cases (p = .08).While a complete TEE-free PFO closure might have potential procedural risks, our approach of pure fluoroscopy-guided with a brisk final TEE check seems to be advantageous in terms of procedural aspects with no sign of any acute or intermediate-term hazard and it could offer an equitable compromise between the two worlds: a complete TEE procedure and a procedure without any TEE.
Terjedelem/Fizikai jellemzők:7
657-663
ISSN:0742-2822