Cierre percutáneo de comunicación interventricular con el dispositivo KONAR-MF

  1. María Alvarez Fuente 1
  2. José Ignacio Carrasco Sousa 2
  3. Beatriz Insa Albert 2
  4. María Toledano 1
  5. Esteban Peiró Molina 2
  6. Juan Pablo Sandoval 3
  7. M.J. del Cerro Marín 1
  1. 1 Servicio de Cardiología Pediátrica y Cardiopatías Congénitas, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, España
  2. 2 Unidad de Cardiología Pediátrica, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, España
  3. 3 Instituto del Corazón, Ciudad de México, México
Show affiliations +
Journal:
REC: Interventional Cardiology

ISSN: 2604-7276,  2604-7306

Year of publication: 2022

Volume: 4

Issue: 3

Pages: 181-185

Type: Article

DOI: 10.24875/RECIC.M22000274 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: REC: Interventional Cardiology

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Percutaneous closure of ventricular septal defect (VSD) can be an alternative to surgery reducing length of stay, and complications. The high risk of atrioventricular block (AVB) involved during percutaneous closure has encouraged the development of new devices such as the KONAR-MF (Lifetech, China). This device is very flexible and has a low radial force that adapts to the anatomy of the VSD without exerting any pressure to the adjacent structures. This is our early experience with this new device. Methods: Retrospective review of patients and VSD closure procedures using the KONAR-MF device at 2 Spanish centers from February 2020—date of the first implantation in our country—through September 2021. Results: A total of 7 closure procedures of VSD were performed being the device successfully implanted in 6 of the 7 patients. A total of 4 native perimembranous VSDs and 3 residual VSDs after tetralogy of Fallot repair were reported. The size of the VSD measured through transesophageal echocardiography and angiography was consistent in all the cases except for 1. In this patient device embolization occurred. At the follow-up [1.2 months (IQR, 0.9-15.5), (maximum 17 months)] we saw worsening atrioventricular conduction in a patient with a previous AVB who required a pacemaker. The immediate residual shunt rate was 83% (5/6) with persistent residual shunt beyond the 1-month follow-up in 1 patient (16%). All patients were discharged from the hospital within the first 48 hours following the intervention. Conclusions: The percutaneous closure of VSD with the KONAR-MF device is a feasible alternative to surgery in selected patients. An adequate anatomical evaluation of the VSD is one of the keys of successful procedures. The implantation of this device is no stranger to complications like AVB or device embolization.

Bibliographic References

  • 1. Lindinger A, Schwedler G, Hense HW. Prevalence of congenital heart defects in newborns in Germany:results of the first registration year of the PAN Study (July 2006 to June 2007). Klin Padiatr. 2010;222:321-326.
  • 2. Zhao LJ, Han B, Zhang JJ, et al. Postprocedural outcomes and risk factors for arrhythmias following transcatheter closure of congenital perimembranous ventricular septal defect:a single-center retrospective study. Chin Med J (Engl). 2017;130:516-521.
  • 3. Ergün S, GençSB, Yildiz O, et al. Risk factors for major adverse events after surgical closure of ventricular septal defect in patients less than 1 year of age:a single-center retrospective. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;34:335-343.
  • 4. Saurav A, Kaushik M, Mahesh Alla V, et al. Comparison of percutaneous device closure versus surgical closure of peri-membranous ventricular septal defects:a systematic review and metaanalysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:1048-1056.
  • 5. Haas NA, Kock L, Bertram H, et al. Interventional VSD-Closure with the Nit-Occlud((R)) Le VSD-Coil in 110 patients:early and midterm results of the EUREVECO-Registry. Pediatr Cardiol. 2017;38:215-227.
  • 6. Huang X-S, Luo Z-R, Chen Q, et al. A Comparative Study of Perventricular and Percutaneous Device Closure Treatments for Isolated Ventricular Septal Defect:A Chinese Single-Institution Experience. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;34:344-351.
  • 7. Nguyen HL, Phan QT, Doan DD, et al. Percutaneous closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect using patent ductus arteriosus occluders. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0206535.
  • 8. Solana-Gracia R, Mendoza Soto A, Carrasco Moreno JI, et al. Spanish registry of percutaneous VSD closure with NitOcclud Le VSD Coil device:lessons learned after more than a hundred implants. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2021;74:591-601.
  • 9. Haddad RN, Daou LS, Saliba ZS. Percutaneous closure of restrictive-type perimembranous ventricular septal defect using the new KONAR multifunctional occluder:Midterm outcomes of the first Middle-Eastern experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;1;96:E295-E302.
  • 10. Tanidir IC, Baspinar O, Saygi M, et al. Use of Lifetech™KONAR-MF, a device for both perimembranous and muscular ventricular septal defects:A multicentre study. Int J Cardiol. 2020;1;310:43-50.
  • 11. Sadiq M, Qureshi AU, Younas M, et al. Percutaneous closure of ventricular septal defect using LifeTechTM KONAR-MF VSD Occluder:initial and short-term multi-institutional results. Cardiol Young. 2021;28:1-7.
  • 12. Schubert S, Kelm M, Koneti NR, et al. First European experience of percutaneous closure of ventricular septal defects using a new CE-marked VSD occluder. EuroIntervention. 2019;12;15:e242-e243.
  • 13. Damsky-Barbosa J, Alonso J, Ferrín L, et al. Endovascular VSD Closure with Lifetech KONAR-Multifunctional Occluder - Novel Device. J Struct Heart Dis. 2019;5:237-247.
  • 14. Leong MC, Alwi M. Complete atrio-ventricular heart block, a not to be forgotten complication in transcatheter closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect –a case report and review of literature. Cardiol Young. 2021;31:2031-2034.
  • 15. Santhanam H, Yang L, Chen Z, et al. A meta-analysis of transcatheter device closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect. Int J Cardiol. 2018;254:75-83.
Data source: Dialnet