Percutaneous Zero-Fluoroscopy Atrial Septal Defect Closure Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Method: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Brian Mendel, Kelvin Kohar, Richie Jonathan Djiu, Defin Allevia Yumnanisha, Justin Winarta, Gusti Ngurah Prana Jagannatha, Theresia Feline Husen, Sisca Natalia Siagian, Radityo Prakoso
{"title":"Percutaneous Zero-Fluoroscopy Atrial Septal Defect Closure Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Method: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Brian Mendel, Kelvin Kohar, Richie Jonathan Djiu, Defin Allevia Yumnanisha, Justin Winarta, Gusti Ngurah Prana Jagannatha, Theresia Feline Husen, Sisca Natalia Siagian, Radityo Prakoso","doi":"10.2174/011573403X337854250227052833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Percutaneous atrial septal defects (ASD) closure with fluoroscopy guidance is the standard procedure. However, fluoroscopy poses stochastic and deterministic risks for small infants and children. Zero fluoroscopy ASD closure is an alternative, yet its feasibility and safety compared to fluoroscopy remain unclear. Therefore, this study compares outcomes using standardized fluoroscopy and zero fluoroscopy methods for transcatheter ASD closure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four databases (PubMed, ProQuest, Google Scholar, Wiley) were used to search literature published before July 2023. The main results were the success rate and the complications. Outcomes were processed using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model of proportional meta-analysis to determine the overall proportion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 68 cohort studies (8,989 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, percutaneous ASD closure was successfully performed in 97% of patients (95%CI: 96-98%) based on 59 studies (8,989 patients), of which fluoroscopy accounted for 97% (95%CI: 96- 98%) based on 51 studies (7,760 patients) and non-fluoroscopy for 98% (95%CI: 96-100%)] based on 8 studies (1,229 patients). Device embolization, AV block, and other arrhythmias did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the percentage difference in residual leaks between the two groups was quite vast, with 5% in the non-fluoroscopy group and 12% in the fluoroscopy group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Percutaneous ASD closure with zero fluoroscopy is safe and effective, as evidenced by the high success rate, and is non-inferior to the standardized fluoroscopy method.</p>","PeriodicalId":10832,"journal":{"name":"Current Cardiology Reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Cardiology Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/011573403X337854250227052833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Percutaneous atrial septal defects (ASD) closure with fluoroscopy guidance is the standard procedure. However, fluoroscopy poses stochastic and deterministic risks for small infants and children. Zero fluoroscopy ASD closure is an alternative, yet its feasibility and safety compared to fluoroscopy remain unclear. Therefore, this study compares outcomes using standardized fluoroscopy and zero fluoroscopy methods for transcatheter ASD closure.

Methods: Four databases (PubMed, ProQuest, Google Scholar, Wiley) were used to search literature published before July 2023. The main results were the success rate and the complications. Outcomes were processed using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model of proportional meta-analysis to determine the overall proportion.

Results: A total of 68 cohort studies (8,989 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, percutaneous ASD closure was successfully performed in 97% of patients (95%CI: 96-98%) based on 59 studies (8,989 patients), of which fluoroscopy accounted for 97% (95%CI: 96- 98%) based on 51 studies (7,760 patients) and non-fluoroscopy for 98% (95%CI: 96-100%)] based on 8 studies (1,229 patients). Device embolization, AV block, and other arrhythmias did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the percentage difference in residual leaks between the two groups was quite vast, with 5% in the non-fluoroscopy group and 12% in the fluoroscopy group.

Conclusion: Percutaneous ASD closure with zero fluoroscopy is safe and effective, as evidenced by the high success rate, and is non-inferior to the standardized fluoroscopy method.

经皮无透视房间隔缺损闭合与透视引导方法:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
导读:经皮房间隔缺损(ASD)关闭与透视指导是标准的程序。然而,透视对小婴儿和儿童具有随机和确定性风险。无透视闭合ASD是一种替代方法,但与透视相比,其可行性和安全性尚不清楚。因此,本研究比较了使用标准化透视和无透视方法进行经导管ASD闭合的结果。方法:采用PubMed、ProQuest、谷歌Scholar、Wiley 4个数据库检索2023年7月前发表的文献。主要结果为手术成功率和并发症。使用比例荟萃分析的dersimonan - laird随机效应模型对结果进行处理,以确定总体比例。结果:本荟萃分析共纳入68项队列研究(8,989例患者)。总体而言,59项研究(8,989例患者)中97%的患者(95%CI: 96-98%)成功进行了经皮ASD闭合,其中51项研究(7,760例患者)中透视检查占97% (95%CI: 96-98%), 8项研究(1,229例患者)中非透视检查占98% (95%CI: 96-100%)。器械栓塞、房室传导阻滞和其他心律失常在两组之间没有显著差异。然而,两组之间残留渗漏的百分比差异相当大,未透视组为5%,透视组为12%。结论:无透视下经皮ASD闭合术安全有效,成功率高,且不逊于标准化透视法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Cardiology Reviews
Current Cardiology Reviews CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
117
期刊介绍: Current Cardiology Reviews publishes frontier reviews of high quality on all the latest advances on the practical and clinical approach to the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease. All relevant areas are covered by the journal including arrhythmia, congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, congenital heart disease, drugs, methodology, pacing, and preventive cardiology. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians in cardiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信