Comparison of 0.052-Inch Coils vs Amplatzer Duct Occluder for Transcatheter Closure of Moderate to Large Patent Ductus Arteriosus

Background Percutaneous device closure is now the widely accepted management technique for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA). In the present study, current practice of closing moderate to large PDA using the Amplatzer duct occluder (ADO) was compared with the previous experience using 0.052-inch coils....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Circulation Journal 2009, Vol.73(2), pp.356-360
Main Authors: Huang, Ta Cheng, Chien, Kuang-Jen, Hsieh, Kai-Sheng, Lin, Chu-Chun, Lee, Cheng-Liang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
0.052-inch coil
Adolescent
Adult
Amplatzer duct occluder
Angiography
Cardiovascular Surgical Procedures - adverse effects
Cardiovascular Surgical Procedures - instrumentation
Cardiovascular Surgical Procedures - methods
Child
Child, Preschool
Ductus Arteriosus, Patent - surgery
Female
Humans
Infant
Male
Middle Aged
Patent ductus arteriosus
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Percutaneous device closure is now the widely accepted management technique for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA). In the present study, current practice of closing moderate to large PDA using the Amplatzer duct occluder (ADO) was compared with the previous experience using 0.052-inch coils. Methods and Results From August 1997 to September 2006, 76 patients were selected for either 0.052-inch coils or ADO implantation. Selection criteria were a minimal diameter of ≥2.5 mm and angiographic type A, C, D or E. In group I, 21 patients received 0.052-inch coils in a multiple coil strategy for PDA closure. In group II, 55 patients underwent ADO device implantation. The age, weight, hemodynamics, minimal PDA diameter and shunt size were insignificantly different between groups. However, group I had a higher rate of failed implantation and device embolization, and the immediate and 24-h closure rates (38.9% vs 81.8%, P
ISSN:1346-9843
1347-4820
DOI:10.1253/circj.CJ-08-0461