Informação da revista
Vol. 37. Núm. 7.
Páginas 631 (Julho 2018)
Partilhar
Partilhar
Baixar PDF
Mais opções do artigo
Vol. 37. Núm. 7.
Páginas 631 (Julho 2018)
Letter to the Editor
Open Access
Residual shunt due to spontaneous perforation of polyvinyl alcohol membrane of ASD Occluder; what about after diagnosis?
Shunt residual devido a perfuração espontânea da membrana de álcool polivinílico de um dispositivo de encerramento de CIA. O que sucede após o diagnóstico?
Visitas
...
Serdar Bozyelça,
Autor para correspondência
seribra85@gmail.com

Corresponding author.
, Tayfun Sahinb
a University of Health Sciences, Derince Training and Research Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Kocaeli, Turkey
b Kocaeli University School of Medicine, Department of Cardiology, Kocaeli, Turkey
Conteúdo relacionado
Rev Port Cardiol. 2017;36:475.e1-310.1016/j.repc.2016.09.020
Sílvia Aguiar Rosa, Filipa Ferreira, Lídia de Sousa, António Fiarresga, José Diogo Martins, Ana Galrinho, Ana Agapito, Paula Fazendas, Fátima F. Pinto, Rui Cruz Ferreira
Informação do artigo
Texto Completo
Bibliografia
Baixar PDF
Estatísticas
Texto Completo
Dear Editor,

We read the article “Successful percutaneous closure of a residual atrial septal defect due to device failure” written by S. Aguiar Rosa et al.1 with great interest. We congratulate the authors for nice three-dimensional echocardiographic images and successful management of the device failure. We also used the CARDIA Ultrasept™ ASD device in 9 patients in our center and three of them became defective after 19 to 25 months, causing significant shunts through the device frame and requiring repeat procedures. We recently reported a patient with a massive shunt due to spontaneous perforation of an Ultrasept™ Occluder polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) membrane.2 Based on our experience and the many cases reported with different versions of the Ultrasept™ prostheses, and considering the possibility of unnoticed and unreported failures, we would like to point out that we do not completely agree with the statement, “Although the use of this material (PVA membrane) in ASD closure devices is generally successful…”, in the discussion section.

The treatment options are surgical removal of the failing device and repair with a patch and covering of the damaged membrane with a second device.3 The authors chose the second option and occluded the defect successfully with a 20-mm Ultrasept™ PFO device. We would also like to mention a few issues about the “device-in-device technique” preferred by the authors. Nobody, either previous authors, including ourselves, or the manufacturer, has been able to explain the mechanism of PVA membrane disappearance.2 Moreover, to our knowledge, Ultrasept™ PFO devices are also covered with a PVA membrane. Surgical repair might therefore be preferable because of the uncertain mechanism of the malfunction. In view of the many risks involved in open heart surgery and taking patient preference into account, the second-device technique can obviously be used. However, a device with a different structure should be chosen to avoid possible recurrence of inadequate endothelialization.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References
[1]
S.A. Rosa, F. Ferreira, L. Sousa, et al.
Successful percutaneous closure of a residual atrial septal defect due to device failure.
Rev Port Cardiol, 36 (2017),
475.e1-475.e3
[2]
S. Bozyel, T. Sahin, E. Dervise, et al.
A massive left-to-right shunt due to delayed spontaneous perforation of polyvinyl alcohol membrane of atrial septal occluder.
Arch Turk Soc Cardiol, 45 (2017), pp. 541-544
[3]
F. Chamié, M. Julio, C.G. a Luiz.
Device-in-device: a transcatheter alternative to surgical explantation of a failing atrial septal defect intracardiac prosthesis.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 88 (2016), pp. 239-243
Copyright © 2018. Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia
Idiomas
Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia

Receba a nossa Newsletter

Opções de artigo
Ferramentas
en pt

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos

Ao assinalar que é «Profissional de Saúde», declara conhecer e aceitar que a responsável pelo tratamento dos dados pessoais dos utilizadores da página de internet da Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia (RPC), é esta entidade, com sede no Campo Grande, n.º 28, 13.º, 1700-093 Lisboa, com os telefones 217 970 685 e 217 817 630, fax 217 931 095 e com o endereço de correio eletrónico revista@spc.pt. Declaro para todos os fins, que assumo inteira responsabilidade pela veracidade e exatidão da afirmação aqui fornecida.