ABSTRACT
Background: Percutaneous device closure of atrial septal defect (ASD) has become an increasingly popular procedure as it offers several advantages. However, it is associated with infrequent, but life?threatening complications such as device embolization. Objective: To analyze the risk factors, common sites of embolization, associated complications, timing of embolization, and the treatment executed. Settings and Design: A retrospective study was performed at a tertiary referral center for cardiac services. Material and Methods: Pre?procedure, intra?procedure, and post?procedure data of patients whose ASD device embolized was collected retrospectively and analyzed for risk factors, common sites of embolization, associated complications, timing of embolization, and the treatment executed. Results: Thirty devices were embolized, out of which 13 were retrieved percutaneously in the Catheter laboratory, whereas 17 patients underwent surgery. Fourteen patients had an unfavorable septal morphology for device closure. Ten devices were embolized in the catheter laboratory, five in the intensive care unit, and two in the ward. The devices were embolized to almost all chambers of the heart and great vessels. One patient had an inferior vena cava rim tear while attempting percutaneous retrieval. One patient required a short period of total circulatory arrest (TCA) for retrieval of the device from ascending aorta, while another required a lateral position for retrieval from descending aorta. One patient required re?exploration for bleeding, while another had an air embolism and succumbed. Conclusions: Once embolization occurs, the risks associated increase manifold. Most of the surgical extractions are uneventful; however, there could be certain complications that may need repair of valvular apparatus, the institution of TCA, or the need for the lateral position. Air embolization though very rare can occur which could be fatal.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction: Type A acute aortic dissection (AAD) remains a challenging cardiac emergency despite the availability of various management strategies. This study compared the outcomes of supracoronary ascending aortic replacement (SCAAR) with aortic valve (AV) resuspension with those of modified Bentall's operation for type A AAD and the progression of aortic regurgitation (AR), long-term dilatation of aortic root and proximal arch, and long-term mortality in SCAAR patients. Methods: Sixty patients underwent surgery for type A AAD (January 2005 to December 2015). Forty-three patients underwent SCAAR with AV resuspension and 17 underwent modified Bentall's operation. All patients were followed up. Results: Upon follow-up of SCAAR patients (n=40), there was significant reduction in aortic root size (preoperative 39.3 mm [9.4] vs. postoperative 33.1 mm [9.1]; P<0.001). Three of these patients worsened to severe AR while others had similar or lesser degree of AR. On comparison between preoperative and postoperative dimensions of all patients (n=53), there was no significant difference in distal ascending aorta size (35.7 mm [8.1] vs. 34.4 mm [8.9]; P=0.52). However, an increase in descending thoracic aorta size (28.8 mm [7.8] vs. 33.7 mm [9.9]; P<0.001) was observed. In-hospital and late mortalities for SCAAR vs. modified Bentall's procedure were 11.7% (seven patients) (7% [3] vs. 23.5% [4]) and 28% (15 patients) (15% [6] vs. 69% [9]), respectively. Conclusion: SCAAR with AV resuspension is a safe surgical option for type A AAD. Preservation of AV is associated with better long-term outcomes and reduced mortality. Modified Bentall's operation may be associated with long-term mortality.