Contributors to and impact of residual shunting after device closure of atrial septal defects.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of residual shunt in patients after device closure of atrial septal defect and its impact on long-term outcome has not been previously defined. METHODS: From a prospective, single-institution registry of 408 patients, we selected individuals with agitated saline studies performed 1 year after closure. Baseline echocardiographic, invasive hemodynamic, and comorbidity data were compared to identify contributors to residual shunt. Survival was determined by review of the medical records and the Social Security Death Index. Survival analysis according to shunt included construction of Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Among 213 analyzed patients, 27% were men and age at repair was 47 ± 17 years. Thirty patients (14%) had residual shunt at 1 year. Residual shunt was more common with Helex (22%) and CardioSEAL/STARFlex (40%) occluder devices than Amplatzer devices (9%; P = .005). Residual shunts were more common in whites (79% vs 46%, P = .004). At 7.3 ± 3.3 years of follow-up, 13 (6%) of patients had died, including 8 (5%) with Amplatzer, 5 (25%) with CardioSEAL/STARFlex, and 0 with Helex devices. Patients with residual shunting had a higher hazard of death (20% vs 4%, P = .001; hazard ratio 4.95 [1.59-14.90]). In an exploratory multivariable analysis, residual shunting, age, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and diastolic dysfunction were associated with death. CONCLUSIONS: Residual shunt after atrial septal defect device closure is common and adversely impacts long-term survival.

Department

Description

Provenance

Subjects

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1016/j.ahj.2016.03.022

Publication Info

Zdradzinski, Michael J, Rachel L Elkin, Joanne M Lee, Athar M Qureshi, Wael El-Mallah and Richard A Krasuski (2016). Contributors to and impact of residual shunting after device closure of atrial septal defects. Am Heart J, 177. pp. 112–119. 10.1016/j.ahj.2016.03.022 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/12513.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.