Advertisement

Closure of foramen ovale triggered by injury to tunnel surfaces of septum primum and secundum

  • Luigi Di Biase
  • J. David Burkhardt
  • Rodney Horton
  • Javier Sanchez
  • Prasant Mohanty
  • Sanghamitra Mohanty
  • Shane Bailey
  • G. Joseph Gallinghouse
  • Andrea Natale
  • Subramaniam C. KrishnanEmail author
Article
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

We investigated the feasibility to proactively stimulate subsequent closure of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) by injuring (mechanical trauma or radiofrequency [RF] energy) the opposing surfaces of the septum primum (SP) and septum secundum (SS).

Methods

1. Mechanical Injury: The interatrial septum of patients who underwent multiple left atrial (LA) ablations over 6 years, where a PFO was used for LA access, were examined. Patients whose PFO was absent during a later procedure were identified. Eleven patients with LA accessed via a PFO also underwent subsequent LA procedures. 2. Ablation: Ten patients undergoing ablation for drug-resistant atrial fibrillation (AF), who also had a PFO, were studied. RF delivery was extended along the upper SP. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) bubble study was repeated after 3 months.

Results

1. Mechanical Injury: Seven were male with a mean age of 58.3 ± 9.99. LA size was 42.73 ± 3.52 mm. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) was 62 ± 7.4%. During the repeat procedure, in 4 patients, the PFO could not be visualized and the fossa ovalis (FO) was punctured. The fourth patient had three procedures. During the second procedure the PFO was accessed, but with difficulty. During the third procedure, it was no longer present. All four patients had subsequent TTE showing no PFO. 2. Ablation: Seven were male with a mean age of 61.1 ± 9.8 years. The mean EF and LA diameters were 55 ± 5% and 4.4 ± 0.8 cm respectively. The mean RF time was 5.4 ± 2.2 min. At 3 months, 9 patients out of 10 showed no interatrial communication.

Conclusion

Injury of tunnel surfaces of the SP and SS by mechanical trauma or ablation can fuse the foramen ovale.

Keywords

Patent foramen ovale Injury Fusion Adhesions 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Andrea Natale: Speaker’s Bureau: Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, and St. Jude Medical. Consultant/Advisory Board: Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and St. Jude Medical.

Luigi Di Biase: Consultant for St. Jude Medical, Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, and Boston Scientific. Recipient of travel and speaker’s honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and Biotronik.

Subramaniam C. Krishnan: In 2006, Dr. Krishnan had applied for a patent on PFO closure technology that has since been abandoned.

References

  1. 1.
    Hagen PT, Scholz DG, Edwards WP. Incidence and size of patent foramen ovale during the first 10 decades of life: an autopsy study of 965 normal hearts. Mayo Clin Proc. 1984;59:17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holmes DR Jr, Cohen H, Katz WE, Reeder GS. Patent foramen ovale, systemic embolization and closure. Curr Prob Cardiol. 2004;29:56–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lechat P, Mas JL, Lascault G, Loron P, Theard M, Klimczac M, et al. Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:1148–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Saver JL, Carroll JD, Thaler DE, Smalling RW, MacDonald LA, Marks DS, et al. Long-term outcomes of patent foramen ovale closure or medical therapy after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;337:1030–2.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mas JL, Derumeaux G, Guillon B, Massardier E, Hosseini H, Mechtouff L, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure or anticoagulation vs. antiplatelets after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1011–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Søndergaard L, Kasner S, Rhodes JF, Andersen G, Iversen HK, Nielsen-Kudsk JE, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure or antiplatelet therapy for cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1033–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khairy P, O’Donnell CP, Landzberg MJ. Transcatheter closure versus medical therapy of patent foramen ovale and presumed paradoxical thromboemboli: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:753–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Onorato E, Melzi G, Casilli F, Pedon L, Rigatelli G, Carozza A, et al. Patent foramen ovale with paradoxical embolism: mid-term results of transcatheter closure in 256 patients. J Interv Cardiol. 2003;16:43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Billinger K, Ostermayer SH, Carminati M, de Giovanni J, Ewert P, Hess J, et al. HELEX septal occluder for transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale: multicenter experience. Eutointervention. 2006;1:465–71.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braun MU, Fassbender D, Schoen SP, Haass M, Schraeder R, Scholtz W, et al. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale in patients with cerebral ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:2019–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krumsdorf U, Ostermayer S, Billinger K, Trepels T, Zadan E, Horvath K, et al. Incidence and clinical course of thrombus formation on atrial septal defect and patient foramen ovale closure devices in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:302–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hara H, Jones TK, Ladich ER, Virmani R, Auth DC, Eichinger JE, et al. Patent foramen ovale closure by radiofrequency thermal coaptation. First experience in the porcine model and healing mechanisms over time. Circulation. 2007;116:648–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sievert H, Fischer E, Heinisch C, Majunke N, Roemer A, Wunderlich N. Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale without an implant. Initial clinical experience. Circulation. 2007;116:1701–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krishnan SC, Salazar M. Septal pouch in the left atrium: a new anatomical entity with potential for embolic complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khairy P, Chauvet P, Lehmann J, Lambert J, Macle L, Tanguay JF, et al. Lower incidence of thrombus formation with cryoenergy versus radiofrequency catheter ablation. Circulation. 2003;107:2045–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pearson AC, Labovitz AJ, Tatineni S, Gomez CR. Superiority of transesophageal echocardiography in detecting cardiac source of embolism in patients with cerebral ischemia of uncertain etiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee RJ, Bartzokis T, Yeoh TK, Grogin HR, Choi D, Schnittger I. Enhanced detection of intracardiac sources of cerebral emboli by transesophageal echocardiography. Stroke. 1991;22:734–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chenzbraun A, Pinto FJ, Schnittger I. Biplane transesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis of patent foramen ovale. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1993;6:417–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pinto FJ. When and how to diagnose patent foramen ovale. Heart. 2005;91:438–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gin KG, Huckell VF, Pollick C. Femoral vein delivery of contrast medium enhances transthoracic echocardiographic detection of patent foramen ovale. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1994–2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clarke NRA, Timperley J, Kelion AD, Banning AP. Transthoracic echocardiography using second harmonic imaging with Valsalva manoueuvre for the detection of right to left shunts. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2004;5:176–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luigi Di Biase
    • 1
    • 3
  • J. David Burkhardt
    • 1
  • Rodney Horton
    • 1
  • Javier Sanchez
    • 1
  • Prasant Mohanty
    • 1
  • Sanghamitra Mohanty
    • 1
  • Shane Bailey
    • 1
  • G. Joseph Gallinghouse
    • 1
  • Andrea Natale
    • 1
  • Subramaniam C. Krishnan
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.The Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David’s Medical CenterAustinUSA
  2. 2.Heart & Vascular InstituteSutter Medical CenterSacramentoUSA
  3. 3.Albert Einstein College of Medicine at Montefiore HospitalNew York USA

Personalised recommendations