Lindsay Morrison

Percutaneous Closure of Postinfarction Ventricular Septal Defect In-Hospital Outcomes and Long-Term Follow-Up of UK Experience

Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P=0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P=0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P=0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P=0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P=0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P=0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P=0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P=0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P=0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P=0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term.Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P =0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P =0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P =0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P =0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P =0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P =0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P =0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P =0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P =0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P =0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-23}

Percutaneous Device Closure of Paravalvular Leak: Combined Experience from the United Kingdom and Ireland

Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure ( P <0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 ( P <0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) ( P <0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P =0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P =0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P =0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P =0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P =0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery. # Clinical Perspectives {#article-title-21}Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure (P<0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 (P<0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) (P<0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P=0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P=0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P=0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P=0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P=0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery.

Occlutech percutaneous patent foramen ovale closure: Safety and efficacy registry (OPPOSE)

INTRODUCTION Safety and efficacy data on patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure with the Occlutech Figulla Flex II device are lacking. We undertook a fully monitored prospective Registry on PFO closure using this device. METHODS 100 patients undergoing PFO closure were enrolled into the OPPOSE Registry at 6 UK centres. The primary endpoint was PFO closure (grade 0 or 1 shunt) at 6-month BCTTE assessed by Corelab. Secondary endpoints included implantation success, complications, and atrial fibrillation during follow-up. RESULTS 100 patients aged 43.8±11.5years, 53% male, were recruited. Indications for PFO closure included stroke (56%), TIA (29%) systemic embolism (4%) and MI (3%). Closure was undertaken under GA (44%) or LA (56%), with TOE (45%), ICE (31%), no imaging (20%) or TTE (3%). Balloon sizing was used in 98% of cases and showed a tunnel length of 7.3±3.6mm, primum-secundum separation of 7.0±2.9mm and basal inlet width of 8.5±3.5mm. Implantation was successful in all cases using 18mm (9%), 25mm (80%), 30mm (10%) and 35mm (1%) devices. 5 patients were lost to follow-up. 92 patients underwent six-month BCTTE. The primary endpoint of PFO closure (grade 0 or 1 shunt) at six months was 79.3%. One patient developed major bleeding (BARC 3b), one patient required vascular surgery, and in one patient device embolization was noted at six months and a larger device implanted. There was one case of new atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS This first prospective monitored data for the Occlutech Figulla Flex II device demonstrates good safety and efficacy data at implant and six-month follow-up.

TCT-28 Occlutech Percutaneous PFO Closure: Safety and Efficacy Registry (OPPOSE)

Safety and efficacy data on patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure with the Occlutech Figulla Flex II device are lacking. We undertook a fully monitored prospective Registry on PFO closure using this device. 100 patients undergoing PFO closure were prospectively enrolled into the OPPOSE Registry at 6

Percutaneous Device Closure of Paravalvular LeakClinical Perspectives: Combined Experience From the United Kingdom and Ireland

Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure ( P <0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 ( P <0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) ( P <0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P =0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P =0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P =0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P =0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P =0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery. # Clinical Perspectives {#article-title-21}Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure (P<0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 (P<0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) (P<0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P=0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P=0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P=0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P=0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P=0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery.

Percutaneous Device Closure of Paravalvular LeakClinical Perspectives

Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure ( P <0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 ( P <0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) ( P <0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P =0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P =0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P =0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P =0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P =0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery. # Clinical Perspectives {#article-title-21}Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure (P<0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 (P<0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) (P<0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P=0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P=0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P=0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P=0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P=0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery.

Percutaneous device closure of paravalvular leak

Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure ( P <0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 ( P <0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) ( P <0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P =0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P =0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P =0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P =0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P =0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery. # Clinical Perspectives {#article-title-21}Background: Paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 5% to 17% of patients following surgical valve replacement. Percutaneous device closure represents an alternative to repeat surgery. Methods: All UK and Ireland centers undertaking percutaneous PVL closure submitted data to the UK PVL Registry. Data were analyzed for association with death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at follow-up. Results: Three hundred eight PVL closure procedures were attempted in 259 patients in 20 centers (2004–2015). Patient age was 67±13 years; 28% were female. The main indications for closure were heart failure (80%) and hemolysis (16%). Devices were successfully implanted in 91% of patients, via radial (7%), femoral arterial (52%), femoral venous (33%), and apical (7%) approaches. Nineteen percent of patients required repeat procedures. The target valve was mitral (44%), aortic (48%), both (2%), pulmonic (0.4%), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (5%). Preprocedural leak was severe (61%), moderate (34%), or mild (5.7%) and was multiple in 37%. PVL improved postprocedure (P<0.001) and was none (33.3%), mild (41.4%), moderate (18.6%), or severe (6.7%) at last follow-up. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 2.7±0.8 preprocedure to 1.6±0.8 (P<0.001) after a median follow-up of 110 (7–452) days. Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency) (P<0.001). MACE during follow-up included death (16%), valve surgery (6%), late device embolization (0.4%), and new hemolysis requiring transfusion (1.6%). Mitral PVL was associated with higher MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; P=0.011). Factors independently associated with death were the degree of persisting leak (HR, 2.87; P=0.037), New York Heart Association class (HR, 2.00; P=0.015) at follow-up and baseline creatinine (HR, 8.19; P=0.001). The only factor independently associated with MACE was the degree of persisting leak at follow-up (HR, 3.01; P=0.002). Conclusion: Percutaneous closure of PVL is an effective procedure that improves PVL severity and symptoms. Severity of persisting leak at follow-up is independently associated with both MACE and death. Percutaneous closure should be considered as an alternative to repeat surgery.

Percutaneous Closure of Postinfarction Ventricular Septal DefectCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE

Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P=0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P=0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P=0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P=0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P=0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P=0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P=0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P=0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P=0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P=0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term.Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P =0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P =0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P =0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P =0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P =0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P =0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P =0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P =0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P =0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P =0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-23}

Percutaneous Closure of Postinfarction Ventricular Septal DefectCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE: In-Hospital Outcomes and Long-Term Follow-Up of UK Experience

Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P=0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P=0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P=0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P=0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P=0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P=0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P=0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P=0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P=0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P=0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term.Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P =0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P =0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P =0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P =0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P =0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P =0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P =0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P =0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P =0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P =0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-23}

Percutaneous Closure of Postinfarction Ventricular Septal Defect

Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P=0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P=0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P=0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P=0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P=0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P=0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P=0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P=0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P=0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P=0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term.Background— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect carries a grim prognosis. Surgical repair offers reasonable outcomes in patients who survive a healing phase. Percutaneous device implantation represents a potentially attractive early alternative. Methods and Results— Postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure was attempted in 53 patients from 11 centers (1997–2012; aged 72±11 years; 42% female). Nineteen percent had previous surgical closure. Myocardial infarction was anterior (66%) or inferior (34%). Time from myocardial infarction to closure procedure was 13 (first and third quartiles, 5–54) days. Devices were successfully implanted in 89% of patients. Major immediate complications included procedural death (3.8%) and emergency cardiac surgery (7.5%). Immediate shunt reduction was graded as complete (23%), partial (62%), or none (15%). Median length of stay after the procedure was 5.0 (2.0–9.0) days. Fifty-eight percent survived to discharge and were followed up for 395 (63–1522) days, during which time 4 additional patients died (7.5%). Factors associated with death after postinfarction ventricular septal defect closure included the following: age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.04; P =0.039), female sex (HR=2.33; P =0.043), New York Heart Association class IV (HR=4.42; P =0.002), cardiogenic shock (HR=3.75; P =0.003), creatinine (HR=1.007; P =0.003), defect size (HR=1.09; P =0.026), inotropes (HR=4.18; P =0.005), and absence of revascularization therapy for presenting myocardial infarction (HR=3.28; P =0.009). Prior surgical closure (HR=0.12; P =0.040) and immediate shunt reduction (HR=0.49; P =0.037) were associated with survival. Conclusions— Percutaneous closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defect is a reasonably effective treatment for these extremely high-risk patients. Mortality remains high, but patients who survive to discharge do well in the longer term. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-23}