Catheter Closure of Clinically Silent Patent Ductus Arteriosus Using the Amplatzer Duct Occluder II-Additional Size: A Single-Center Experience

• Published in: Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) Vol. 13; no. 8; p. e17481
• Main Authors: Bhat, Yasser A, Almesned, Abdulrahman, Alqwaee, Abdullah, Al Akhfash, Ali
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Palo Alto (CA) Cureus 27.08.2021
• Subjects: Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery; Cardiology; Pediatrics
• ISSN: 2168-8184; 2168-8184
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.17481

Objectives Transcatheter closure is the treatment of choice for most patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in infants, children, and adults. However, there is a controversy regarding transcatheter closure of clinically silent PDAs. Some authors favor device closure to eliminate the lifelong risk of infective endarteritis while others recommend avoiding PDA closure in such patients. The study describes our experience of closing the silent PDAs using the Amplatzer duct occluder II-additional size (ADO II-AS) (St. Jude Medical Corp, St. Paul, MN). Materials and methods From April 2018 through March 2021, 52 consecutive pediatric patients aged 18 years and less with clinically silent PDA who had transcatheter closure at our center were enrolled. Patients were excluded if they had clinically detected PDAs; had surgical ligation of PDA with no residual shunt; had left heart dilatation on echocardiography; or moderate-sized PDAs closed with ADO II-AS. In addition, patients with an innocent murmur or murmur due to an associated lesion were included. This study was retrospective, and all of the 52 patients underwent PDA device closure using ADO II-AS. Results Fifty-two consecutive patients were enrolled with a median age of 17 months, range (97-2.5) 94.5 months. Mean weight was 11.29 kilogram, range (24.8-3.5) 21.3 kilogram, and mean follow-up was 13.5 months, range (29-0) 29 months. Thirty-one (59.6%) were females, and 21 (40.4%) were males. The mean procedure time was 30.6 min, range (60-10) 50 min, and mean fluoroscopic time was 5.5 min, range (28-1.7) 26.3 min. The mean volume of contrast given was 9.1 milliliter, range (30-4) 26 milliliter. Forty-five (45; 88.2%) patients had immediate closure of PDA. No patients had anesthetic or vascular complications; however, two patients had procedural complications. Device placement was unsuccessful in one patient with Downs syndrome. The mean follow-up for our patients was 13.5 months, range (29-0) 29 months; the patients were asymptomatic at the follow-up, and none of the patients had any residual leak. None of the patients showed coarctation or left pulmonary artery stenosis at the latest follow-up. Conclusion The usefulness of catheter-based therapy for silent PDA is less well-established by current evidence. Further studies are needed to justify the intervention solely based on the premise that the silent duct is a substrate for infective endarteritis; however, our reason to close silent PDA was to do so primarily because of social reasons. This study found that device closure of silent PDA is safe and effective using an ADO II-AS device with minimal risk of embolization and a low residual shunt rate. Coils have been used to close small PDAs, however, with higher rates of embolization and device malpositioning. We believe ADO-II AS offers an advantage of safety and efficacy over coils. In addition, the study highlights the advantage of using an ADO II-AS device, which can be delivered via a four French delivery system with no arterial complications.