Loading…

Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)

This randomized trial compared procedural complications and 30-day clinical outcomes of 3 patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure devices (Amplatzer, Helex, and CardioSEAL-STARflex). It examined 660 patients (361 men, 299 women, mean age 49.3 ± 1.9 years), with 220 patients per group. All patients had a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of cardiology 2008-05, Vol.101 (9), p.1253
Main Authors: Taaffe, Margaret, Fischer, Evelyn, Baranowski, Andreas, Majunke, Nicolas, Heinisch, Corinna, Leetz, Michaela, Hein, Ralph, Bayard, Yves, Büscheck, Franziska, Reschke, Madlen, Hoffmann, Ilona, Wunderlich, Nina, Wilson, Neil, Sievert, Horst
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1253
container_title The American journal of cardiology
container_volume 101
creator Taaffe, Margaret
Fischer, Evelyn
Baranowski, Andreas
Majunke, Nicolas
Heinisch, Corinna
Leetz, Michaela
Hein, Ralph
Bayard, Yves
Büscheck, Franziska
Reschke, Madlen
Hoffmann, Ilona
Wunderlich, Nina
Wilson, Neil
Sievert, Horst
description This randomized trial compared procedural complications and 30-day clinical outcomes of 3 patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure devices (Amplatzer, Helex, and CardioSEAL-STARflex). It examined 660 patients (361 men, 299 women, mean age 49.3 ± 1.9 years), with 220 patients per group. All patients had a history of paradoxical embolism. All PFO closures were successful technically. Exchange of devices for others was most frequently required for the Helex occluder (7 of 220) and 2 of 220 in either of the other groups. Three device embolizations in the Helex group were retrieved and replaced successfully. One patient with a Helex occluder developed a transient ischemic attack and recovered without treatment. A hemopericardium in that group was punctured without affecting the device. One tamponade in the Amplatzer group required surgical device explantation. In 8 of 660 patients in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, thrombi resolved after anticoagulation. Sixteen patients (11 in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, 3 in the Amplatzer group, and 2 in the Helex group) had episodes of atrial fibrillation. PFOs were closed completely in 143 of 220 patients (65%) in the Amplatzer group, 116 of 220 patients (52.7%) in the Helex group, and 137 of 220 patients (62.3%) in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group at 30 days with significant differences between the Helex and Amplatzer occluders (p = 0.0005) and the Helex and CardioSEAL-STARflex occluders (p = 0.0003). PFO closure can be performed safely with each device. In conclusion, the Helex occluder embolized more frequently. Device thrombus formation and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were more common with the CardioSEAL-STARflex occluder. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_230373880</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1480888961</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_2303738803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNistKw0AUQIei0Pj4h4srXQRmOtomyxBbWhAqbXBbLskNnTKZiXcyRfoL_rRZ6N7V4XDORCQqW-SpypW-EomUcpbm6jmfipsQTqMq9TJPxHfpux7ZBO_At1AdmQjecSA3wMozduRge0ZLUFofIhO80tnUFMA4QNiha3xnLtRAxQYtPBZdb3G4EMMHcYgBSuTG-P2yeEv3VbFrN_T1l9ZkR9nWtY0N8dOduG7RBrr_5a14WC2rcp327D8jheFw8pHdmA4zLfVCZ5nU_5p-AKuGU-U</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230373880</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Taaffe, Margaret ; Fischer, Evelyn ; Baranowski, Andreas ; Majunke, Nicolas ; Heinisch, Corinna ; Leetz, Michaela ; Hein, Ralph ; Bayard, Yves ; Büscheck, Franziska ; Reschke, Madlen ; Hoffmann, Ilona ; Wunderlich, Nina ; Wilson, Neil ; Sievert, Horst</creator><creatorcontrib>Taaffe, Margaret ; Fischer, Evelyn ; Baranowski, Andreas ; Majunke, Nicolas ; Heinisch, Corinna ; Leetz, Michaela ; Hein, Ralph ; Bayard, Yves ; Büscheck, Franziska ; Reschke, Madlen ; Hoffmann, Ilona ; Wunderlich, Nina ; Wilson, Neil ; Sievert, Horst</creatorcontrib><description>This randomized trial compared procedural complications and 30-day clinical outcomes of 3 patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure devices (Amplatzer, Helex, and CardioSEAL-STARflex). It examined 660 patients (361 men, 299 women, mean age 49.3 ± 1.9 years), with 220 patients per group. All patients had a history of paradoxical embolism. All PFO closures were successful technically. Exchange of devices for others was most frequently required for the Helex occluder (7 of 220) and 2 of 220 in either of the other groups. Three device embolizations in the Helex group were retrieved and replaced successfully. One patient with a Helex occluder developed a transient ischemic attack and recovered without treatment. A hemopericardium in that group was punctured without affecting the device. One tamponade in the Amplatzer group required surgical device explantation. In 8 of 660 patients in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, thrombi resolved after anticoagulation. Sixteen patients (11 in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, 3 in the Amplatzer group, and 2 in the Helex group) had episodes of atrial fibrillation. PFOs were closed completely in 143 of 220 patients (65%) in the Amplatzer group, 116 of 220 patients (52.7%) in the Helex group, and 137 of 220 patients (62.3%) in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group at 30 days with significant differences between the Helex and Amplatzer occluders (p = 0.0005) and the Helex and CardioSEAL-STARflex occluders (p = 0.0003). PFO closure can be performed safely with each device. In conclusion, the Helex occluder embolized more frequently. Device thrombus formation and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were more common with the CardioSEAL-STARflex occluder. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9149</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1913</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJCDAG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Elsevier Limited</publisher><subject>Cardiology ; Clinical outcomes ; Clinical trials ; Comparative studies ; Heart ; Medical equipment ; Medical treatment ; Surgical apparatus &amp; instruments</subject><ispartof>The American journal of cardiology, 2008-05, Vol.101 (9), p.1253</ispartof><rights>Copyright Elsevier Sequoia S.A. May 1, 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Taaffe, Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, Evelyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baranowski, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majunke, Nicolas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinisch, Corinna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leetz, Michaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hein, Ralph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayard, Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Büscheck, Franziska</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reschke, Madlen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Ilona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wunderlich, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Neil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sievert, Horst</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)</title><title>The American journal of cardiology</title><description>This randomized trial compared procedural complications and 30-day clinical outcomes of 3 patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure devices (Amplatzer, Helex, and CardioSEAL-STARflex). It examined 660 patients (361 men, 299 women, mean age 49.3 ± 1.9 years), with 220 patients per group. All patients had a history of paradoxical embolism. All PFO closures were successful technically. Exchange of devices for others was most frequently required for the Helex occluder (7 of 220) and 2 of 220 in either of the other groups. Three device embolizations in the Helex group were retrieved and replaced successfully. One patient with a Helex occluder developed a transient ischemic attack and recovered without treatment. A hemopericardium in that group was punctured without affecting the device. One tamponade in the Amplatzer group required surgical device explantation. In 8 of 660 patients in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, thrombi resolved after anticoagulation. Sixteen patients (11 in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, 3 in the Amplatzer group, and 2 in the Helex group) had episodes of atrial fibrillation. PFOs were closed completely in 143 of 220 patients (65%) in the Amplatzer group, 116 of 220 patients (52.7%) in the Helex group, and 137 of 220 patients (62.3%) in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group at 30 days with significant differences between the Helex and Amplatzer occluders (p = 0.0005) and the Helex and CardioSEAL-STARflex occluders (p = 0.0003). PFO closure can be performed safely with each device. In conclusion, the Helex occluder embolized more frequently. Device thrombus formation and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were more common with the CardioSEAL-STARflex occluder. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Medical equipment</subject><subject>Medical treatment</subject><subject>Surgical apparatus &amp; instruments</subject><issn>0002-9149</issn><issn>1879-1913</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNistKw0AUQIei0Pj4h4srXQRmOtomyxBbWhAqbXBbLskNnTKZiXcyRfoL_rRZ6N7V4XDORCQqW-SpypW-EomUcpbm6jmfipsQTqMq9TJPxHfpux7ZBO_At1AdmQjecSA3wMozduRge0ZLUFofIhO80tnUFMA4QNiha3xnLtRAxQYtPBZdb3G4EMMHcYgBSuTG-P2yeEv3VbFrN_T1l9ZkR9nWtY0N8dOduG7RBrr_5a14WC2rcp327D8jheFw8pHdmA4zLfVCZ5nU_5p-AKuGU-U</recordid><startdate>20080501</startdate><enddate>20080501</enddate><creator>Taaffe, Margaret</creator><creator>Fischer, Evelyn</creator><creator>Baranowski, Andreas</creator><creator>Majunke, Nicolas</creator><creator>Heinisch, Corinna</creator><creator>Leetz, Michaela</creator><creator>Hein, Ralph</creator><creator>Bayard, Yves</creator><creator>Büscheck, Franziska</creator><creator>Reschke, Madlen</creator><creator>Hoffmann, Ilona</creator><creator>Wunderlich, Nina</creator><creator>Wilson, Neil</creator><creator>Sievert, Horst</creator><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>7TS</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080501</creationdate><title>Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)</title><author>Taaffe, Margaret ; Fischer, Evelyn ; Baranowski, Andreas ; Majunke, Nicolas ; Heinisch, Corinna ; Leetz, Michaela ; Hein, Ralph ; Bayard, Yves ; Büscheck, Franziska ; Reschke, Madlen ; Hoffmann, Ilona ; Wunderlich, Nina ; Wilson, Neil ; Sievert, Horst</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_2303738803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Medical equipment</topic><topic>Medical treatment</topic><topic>Surgical apparatus &amp; instruments</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Taaffe, Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, Evelyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baranowski, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majunke, Nicolas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinisch, Corinna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leetz, Michaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hein, Ralph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayard, Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Büscheck, Franziska</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reschke, Madlen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Ilona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wunderlich, Nina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Neil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sievert, Horst</creatorcontrib><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The American journal of cardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Taaffe, Margaret</au><au>Fischer, Evelyn</au><au>Baranowski, Andreas</au><au>Majunke, Nicolas</au><au>Heinisch, Corinna</au><au>Leetz, Michaela</au><au>Hein, Ralph</au><au>Bayard, Yves</au><au>Büscheck, Franziska</au><au>Reschke, Madlen</au><au>Hoffmann, Ilona</au><au>Wunderlich, Nina</au><au>Wilson, Neil</au><au>Sievert, Horst</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of cardiology</jtitle><date>2008-05-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>101</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1253</spage><pages>1253-</pages><issn>0002-9149</issn><eissn>1879-1913</eissn><coden>AJCDAG</coden><abstract>This randomized trial compared procedural complications and 30-day clinical outcomes of 3 patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure devices (Amplatzer, Helex, and CardioSEAL-STARflex). It examined 660 patients (361 men, 299 women, mean age 49.3 ± 1.9 years), with 220 patients per group. All patients had a history of paradoxical embolism. All PFO closures were successful technically. Exchange of devices for others was most frequently required for the Helex occluder (7 of 220) and 2 of 220 in either of the other groups. Three device embolizations in the Helex group were retrieved and replaced successfully. One patient with a Helex occluder developed a transient ischemic attack and recovered without treatment. A hemopericardium in that group was punctured without affecting the device. One tamponade in the Amplatzer group required surgical device explantation. In 8 of 660 patients in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, thrombi resolved after anticoagulation. Sixteen patients (11 in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group, 3 in the Amplatzer group, and 2 in the Helex group) had episodes of atrial fibrillation. PFOs were closed completely in 143 of 220 patients (65%) in the Amplatzer group, 116 of 220 patients (52.7%) in the Helex group, and 137 of 220 patients (62.3%) in the CardioSEAL-STARflex group at 30 days with significant differences between the Helex and Amplatzer occluders (p = 0.0005) and the Helex and CardioSEAL-STARflex occluders (p = 0.0003). PFO closure can be performed safely with each device. In conclusion, the Helex occluder embolized more frequently. Device thrombus formation and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were more common with the CardioSEAL-STARflex occluder. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Elsevier Limited</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-9149
ispartof The American journal of cardiology, 2008-05, Vol.101 (9), p.1253
issn 0002-9149
1879-1913
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_230373880
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects Cardiology
Clinical outcomes
Clinical trials
Comparative studies
Heart
Medical equipment
Medical treatment
Surgical apparatus & instruments
title Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARfIex Versus Helex Occluder)
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T02%3A07%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Three%20Patent%20Foramen%20Ovale%20Closure%20Devices%20in%20a%20Randomized%20Trial%20(Amplatzer%20Versus%20CardioSEAL-STARfIex%20Versus%20Helex%20Occluder)&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20cardiology&rft.au=Taaffe,%20Margaret&rft.date=2008-05-01&rft.volume=101&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1253&rft.pages=1253-&rft.issn=0002-9149&rft.eissn=1879-1913&rft.coden=AJCDAG&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1480888961%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_2303738803%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230373880&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true