OBJECTIVES: To compare pre- and post-procedure electrocardiograms (ECGs) in a large cohort of patients after percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect (ASD) and patent foramen ovale (PFO). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous device closure of ASD or PFO is commonplace. Conduction and rhythm anomalies associated with percutaneous device placement have been reported. METHODS: We reviewed records for all patients who underwent percutaneous device closure of ASD or PFO at our institution from 1999 to 2008. Pre-procedure ECG and Holter studies were compared to available short term (<2 months after placement) and intermediate follow-up (>2 months) ECG or Holter. RESULTS: Pre- and post-procedural ECGs were available in 610 patients (305 females, average age 50 ± 18.1 years, range 1-91 years, 384 PFO, 184 ASD, 42 with multiple defects, mean device size 16 mm, range 5-38 mm). We report an incidence of 5.2% (32/610) of arrhythmias in the 4 months following device placement, including 29 patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATs, 22 fibrillation, 7 flutter), 1 with junctional tachycardia, and 2 with heart block. Among other findings, the average P-wave duration was increased on intermediate follow-up as compared to early follow-up (P < 0.001). Development of new-onset 1st degree AV Block after the procedure was associated with an increased risk of ATs post-procedure (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We report a low risk of clinically significant post-procedure arrhythmias after device placement. Clinically significant heart block occurred in only two patients (0.3%). Changes in several markers of atrial conduction were found, suggesting an effect of device closure on intra-atrial conduction.
OBJECTIVES: To compare pre- and post-procedure electrocardiograms (ECGs) in a large cohort of patients after percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect (ASD) and patent foramen ovale (PFO). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous device closure of ASD or PFO is commonplace. Conduction and rhythm anomalies associated with percutaneous device placement have been reported. METHODS: We reviewed records for all patients who underwent percutaneous device closure of ASD or PFO at our institution from 1999 to 2008. Pre-procedure ECG and Holter studies were compared to available short term (<2 months after placement) and intermediate follow-up (>2 months) ECG or Holter. RESULTS: Pre- and post-procedural ECGs were available in 610 patients (305 females, average age 50 ± 18.1 years, range 1-91 years, 384 PFO, 184 ASD, 42 with multiple defects, mean device size 16 mm, range 5-38 mm). We report an incidence of 5.2% (32/610) of arrhythmias in the 4 months following device placement, including 29 patients with atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATs, 22 fibrillation, 7 flutter), 1 with junctional tachycardia, and 2 with heart block. Among other findings, the average P-wave duration was increased on intermediate follow-up as compared to early follow-up (P < 0.001). Development of new-onset 1st degree AV Block after the procedure was associated with an increased risk of ATs post-procedure (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We report a low risk of clinically significant post-procedure arrhythmias after device placement. Clinically significant heart block occurred in only two patients (0.3%). Changes in several markers of atrial conduction were found, suggesting an effect of device closure on intra-atrial conduction.
Authors: Henry Chubb; John Whitaker; Steven E Williams; Catherine E Head; Natali Ay Chung; Matthew J Wright; Mark O'Neill Journal: Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev Date: 2014-11-29