目的评价单穿刺点经胸微创封堵治疗房间隔缺损（ASD）合并室间隔缺损（VSD）的安全性及有效性。 方法纳入2014年6月至2015年8月于我院成功完成单穿刺点经胸微创封堵术治疗ASD合并VSD的8例患儿，分析患儿在术后第l个月、3个月、6个月的门诊随访资料。观察围术期及随访期间患者残余分流、瓣膜反流、心律失常等并发症发生情况。 结果8例患儿中，术后早期均无残余分流、心律失常，微量三尖瓣反流（TR）患者1例（12.5%）。平均随访时间5～9（6±2）个月，各瓣膜均未发现中度及以上反流，未发现存在血栓、严重心律失常、死亡的患者。 结论单穿刺点经胸微创封堵治疗ASD合并VSD安全、有效，且更为微创。
ObjectiveTo compare the effects of transthoracic device closure and traditional surgical repair on atrial septal defect systemically.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, VIP, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang Database up to July 31, 2018 to identify trials according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality was assessed and data of included articles were extracted. The meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software.ResultsThirty studies were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 27 cohort studies involving 3 321 patients. For success rate, the transthoracic closure group was lower than that in the surgical repair group (CCT, OR=0.34, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.69, P=0.003). There was no statistical difference in mortality between the two groups (CCT, OR=0.43, 95%CI 0.12 to 1.52, P=0.19). Postoperative complication occurred less frequently in the transthoracic closure group than that in the surgical repair group (RCT, OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.77, P=0.01; CCT, OR=0.27, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.42, P<0.000 01). The risk of postoperative arrhythmia in the transthoracic closure group was lower than that in the surgical repair group (CCT, OR=0.56, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.90, P=0.02). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative residual shunt in postoperative one month (CCT, OR=4.52, 95%CI 0.45 to 45.82, P=0.20) and in postoperative one year (CCT, OR=1.03, 95%CI 0.29 to 3.68, P=0.97) between the two groups. Although the duration of operation (RCT MD=–55.90, 95%CI –58.69 to –53.11, P<0.000 01; CCT MD=–71.68, 95%CI –79.70 to –63.66, P<0.000 01), hospital stay (CCT, MD=–3.31, 95%CI –4.16, –2.46, P<0.000 01) and ICU stay(CCT, MD=–10.15, 95%CI –14.38 to –5.91, P<0.000 01), mechanical ventilation (CCT, MD=–228.68, 95%CI –247.60 to –209.77, P<0.000 01) in the transthoracic closure group were lower than those in the traditional surgical repair group, the transthoracic closure costed more than traditional surgical repair during being in the hospital (CCT, MD=1 221.42, 95%CI 1 124.70 to 1 318.14, P<0.000 01).ConclusionCompared with traditional surgical repair, the transthoracic closure reduces the hospital stay, shortens the length of ICU stay and the duration of ventilator assisted ventilation, while has less postoperative complications. It is safe and reliable for patients with ASD within the scope of indication.
Objective To compare the effects of transthoracic device closure and surgical closure on ventricular septal defect systemically. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, VIP, CNKI, CBM, Chinese Clinical Trial Register, ClinicalTrials. gov and Wanfang Database up to July 31, 2016. Quality was assessed and data of included articles were extracted. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.0 and Stata 14.0 software. Results Eleven studies were identified, including 5 RCTs and 6 cohort studies involving 2 504 patients. For success rate, there was no statistical difference between the transthoracic closure group and the surgical closure group in RCT (RR=0.99, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.03, P=0.70); the success rate in the transthoracic closure group was lower than that in the surgical closure group in the cohort study (OR=0.21, 95%CI 0.08 to 0.55, P=0.002). Both results of RCTs and cohort studies showed that compared with surgical closure, transthoracic device closure reduced duration of the operation (RCT MD=–79.38, 95%CI –95.00 to –63.76, P<0.000 01; cohort studyMD=–66.26, 95%CI –71.20 to –61.31, P<0.000 01) and hospital stay (RCTMD=–2.10, 95%CI –2.65 to –1.55, P<0.000 01; cohort studyMD=–3.99, 95%CI –6.03 to –1.94, P=0.000 1), and the patients with blood transfusion (RCT RR= 0.04, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.11, P<0.000 01; cohort studyOR=0.01, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.13, P=0.001). In the transthoracic closure group the risk of postoperative arrhythmia reduced (RCT RR=0.20, 95%CI 0.13 to 0.32, P<0.000 01; cohort studyOR=0.46, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.67, P<0.000 1). In the transthoracic closure group a higher postoperative valvular regurgitation risk in RCT induced (RR=1.45, 95%CI 1.07 to 1.96, P=0.02) and the rate of postoperative valvular regurgitation in cohort study reduced (OR=0.43, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.92, P=0.03). However, there was no statistical difference in postoperative residual shunt (RCT RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.62, P=0.89; cohort study OR=0.52, 95%CI 0.12 to 2.25, P=0.38). Conclusion Transthoracic device closure can shorten duration of the operation, hospital stay and reduce the patients with blood transfusion and post- and intraoperative arrhythmia risk. Therefore, transthoracic device closure may be a better approach for some ventricular septal defect patients.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of blocking congenital ventricular septal defect or congenital atrial septal defect through the small vertical incision of right subaxillary. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 38 patients underwent the surgery of blocking congenital ventricular septal defect or congenital atrial septal defect in our hospital from January to August 2015. There were 22 males and 16 females with a mean age of 10.3±5.2 months, weight of 8.2±3.5 kg. ResultsThere were 34 patients (89.5%) successfully blocked through the small vertical cut of right subaxillary. The average blood loss of those 34 patients was 19.5±13.4 ml and the mean time of surgery was 58.4±28.5 minutes. Four patients (10.5%) with ventricular septal defect failed to block because of aortic valve prolapse. Those patients underwent direct repair of ventricular septal defect under extracorporeal circulation while general anesthesia. There was no serious adverse event during the surgery. The extubation time was 3.9±1.6 hours, the ICU monitoring time was 1.8±0.8 days and the hospital stay time was 3.2±0.5 days. All patients discharged uneventfully. ConclusionBlocking congenital ventricular septal defect or congenital atrial septal defect through the cut of right subaxillary is a feasible, effective, safe, and minimally invasive method. The effect of early follow-up is well.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the mid-term safety, efficacy and feasibility of perventricular device closure for subarterial ventricular septal defect.MethodsClinical data of 97 patients diagnosed with subarterial ventricular septal defect through echocardiography in West China Hospital from September 2013 to December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 66 males and 31 females aged 3 (1.8, 5.9) years. All the patients underwent perventricular device closure under the guidance of transesophageal echocardiography using eccentric occlusion device. Possible complications such as residual shunt, valvular regurgitation, atrioventricular conduction block and arrhythmias were recorded during the 1-year, 3-year and 5-year follow-up.ResultsAll the patients received perventricular device closure successfully except that 1 patient underwent open surgical repair under cardiopulmonary bypass 3 months later because of the migration of device. So the rate of complete closure was 99.0%. No residual shunt, moderate or severe valvular regurgitation, atrioventricular conduction block or arrhythmias were observed 5 years later.ConclusionTreating subarterial ventricular septal defect through perventricular device closure exhibits remarkable mid-term efficacy, safety and feasibility with high success rate.