Surgical Removal of Occluder Devices: Complications and Pitfalls
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1532/HSF98.20091041Abstract
Interventional closures of atrial septal defects (ASDs) and paravalvular leaks represent attractive treatment options to prevent surgical procedures. Nevertheless, a small number of complications or pitfalls remain after interventional closure of ASDs or paravalvular leaks that require surgical therapy. We report on 3 cases in which surgery was necessary after attempts to close a paravalvular leak. A mechanical valve prosthesis in the mitral position was explanted from a 73-year-old man because of increasing hemolysis and restriction of the motion of one leaflet by the occluder device. A 21-year-old woman with 3 previous surgeries for truncus arteriosus communis type 1 developed paravalvular leakage after replacements of the pulmonary and aortic valves. Although aortic insufficiency was reduced to grade I by placing 2 Amplatzer occluders, significant hemolysis developed. A 24-year-old woman had previously undergone 3 cardiac surgeries (commissurotomy at the age of 5 years for aortic stenosis, followed by aortic valve replacements at 13 and 14 years of age). The patient developed severe hemolysis after interventional closure. A redo aortic valve replacement was performed for the fourth time. As in the previous 2 cases, the surgery for this challenging case and the postoperative course went well. We also present 6 cases in which the occluder was explanted because of dislocation, thrombus formation, irritation of the aortic root, or systemic allergic reaction to the percutaneous occluder after initial closure of the ASD. The intra- and postoperative courses were uneventful in all cases. In summary, surgery for complications or pitfalls after interventional closure of paravalvular leaks or ASDs is challenging and carries a high risk in cases of paravalvular leaks. Nevertheless, the outcomes of the presented cases were uneventful. In the future, the development of a more suitable device technology may improve the results of interventional procedures, especially in cases of paravalvular leaks.References
Bonatti J, Bonaros N, Müller S, Bartel T 2008. Completely endoscopic removal of a dislocated Amplatzer atrial septal defect closure device. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 7:130-2.nDu Z, Hijazi Z, Kleinman C, Silverman N, Larntz K 2002. Comparison between transcatheter and surgical closure of secundum atrial septal defect in children and adults: results of a multicenter nonrandomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:1836-44.nHein R, Skowasch M, Wunderlich N, Wilson N, Sievert H 2006. Catheter treatment of paravalvular leaks using Amplatzer devices. Am J Cardiol 98(suppl S):231M.nHourihan M, Perry SB, Mandell VS, et al. 1992. Transcatheter umbrella closure of valvular and paravalvular leaks. J Am Coll Cardiol 20:1371-7.nKrumsdorf U, Ostermeyer S, Billinger K, et al. 2004. Incidence and clinical course of thrombus formation on atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale closure devices in 1000 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 43:302-9.nLasorda DM, Mohsin JC 2008. Percutaneous closure of perivalvular mitral regurgitation with an Amplatzer occluder device in a patient with both prosthetic mitral and aortic valves. J Interv Cardiol 21:190-5.nPate GE, Al Zubaidi A, Chandavimol M, Thompson CR, Munt BI, Webb JG 2006. Percutaneous closure of prosthetic paravalvular leaks: case series and review. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 68:528-33.nRigby ML 1999. The era of transcatheter closure of atrial septal defects. Heart 81:227-8.nSchaeffler R, Sarikouch S, Peuster M 2007. Transcatheter closure of a ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm (RSVA) after aortic valve replacement using the Amplatzer muscular VSD occluder. Clin Res Cardiol 96:904-6.nShapira Y, Hirsch R, Kornowski R, et al. 2007. Percutaneous closure of perivalvular leaks with Amplatzer occluders: feasibility, safety, and shortterm results. J Heart Valve Dis 16 305-13.n
