4.6 Article

Perventricular device closure of ventricular septal defects: Six months results in 30 young children

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 86, Issue 1, Pages 142-146

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.03.058

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Both surgical repair and transcatheter closure of isolated ventricular septal defects are known to have limitations in children. This report describes the short-term results of perventricular device closure of nonmuscular ventricular septal defects without cardiopulmonary bypass in young children. Methods. Thirty patients who had nonmuscular ventricular septal defects underwent perventricular closure by minimally invasive technique without cardiopulmonary bypass. A subxiphoid minimally invasive incision was performed. Under the continuous guidance of transesophageal echocardiography, the free wall of the right ventricle was punctured and a guidewire was introduced into the left ventricle through the defect. A delivery sheath was advanced over the wire and through the defect into the left ventricle. The device was released. Results. Closure was successful in 27 patients (90%). There was no mortality or atrioventricular block perioperatively or during the entire follow-up period. Three patients developed incomplete right bundle branch blocks and seven patients developed new trace or mild tricuspid regurgitation after the closure. The mean hospital stay was 3.6 +/- 0.7 days (range, 3 to 5 days) and no patient needed any blood or blood products. Follow-up at 6 months showed that two of the three patients had persistent incomplete right bundle branch block and three of the seven patients had persistent closure-related trace or mild tricuspid regurgitation. Conclusions. Perventricular device closure of isolated ventricular septal defects without cardiopulmonary bypass appeared to be safe and efficacious in selected young children. The outcomes of short-term follow-up are acceptable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available