The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.08.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Early Cardiac Perforation After Atrial Septal Defect Closure With the Amplatzer Septal Occluder

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Erosion events associated with the ASO device have occurred at the roof of the right or left atrium or at the atrial junction with the aorta, causing hemopericardium, tamponade or aortic fistula [3–26]. The reasons for erosion are unknown, but several risk factors have been proposed, all of which increase the chance of contact between the device and the atrial wall: absent or deficient superior–anterior rim [4, 6, 9, 16, 17, 20–22, 24–26], device‐sizing (over‐sizing [6, 13, 20, 22, 24, 25] vs. under‐sizing [9]), both of which predispose toward contact of the device with the aortic root [3, 6, 9, 25]; and/or device‐straddling of the aorta (presence [4, 18] versus absence [10]). Early risk factors have also been proposed such as deformation of the device at the aortic root at 24 h and early pericardial effusion [24].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Erosion events associated with the ASO device have occurred at the roof of the right or left atrium or at the atrial junction with the aorta, causing hemopericardium, tamponade or aortic fistula [3–26]. The reasons for erosion are unknown, but several risk factors have been proposed, all of which increase the chance of contact between the device and the atrial wall: absent or deficient superior–anterior rim [4, 6, 9, 16, 17, 20–22, 24–26], device‐sizing (over‐sizing [6, 13, 20, 22, 24, 25] vs. under‐sizing [9]), both of which predispose toward contact of the device with the aortic root [3, 6, 9, 25]; and/or device‐straddling of the aorta (presence [4, 18] versus absence [10]). Early risk factors have also been proposed such as deformation of the device at the aortic root at 24 h and early pericardial effusion [24].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…31,42 They included device migration/malposition, infection, severe arrhythmias, thromboembolism, device-related valvular regurgitation, and cardiac erosion/perforation. 5,[9][10][11]43,44 Device erosion has been reported in 0.1% of cases, chiefly in patients with aortic rim deficiency and is probably ascribable to the use of an oversized device. 5,6,35 Whether device closure of ASD carries a risk of progressive aortic insufficiency remains controversial.…”
Section: Long-term Outcomes After Large Asd Closurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Concern about deploying large devices has been exacerbated by recent reports of severe complications such as aortic erosion, cardiac perforation, atrioventricular block, or device-related aortic regurgitation. [9][10][11][12] The Amplatzer Septal Occluder (ASO, Saint Jude Medical, St Paul, MN) is the most widely used device for percutaneous ASD closure worldwide.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[2][3][4][5][6] However, early and late cardiac erosion/perforation after ASD closure with the device, which is a rare but life-threatening complication, has been reported. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] The cause of erosion has not yet been fully clarified. Meanwhile, there is a report that the profile of ASO becomes lower within 6 months after deployment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%