Transcatheter versus surgical closure of secundum atrial septal defect in adults: impact of age at intervention. A concurrent matched comparative study.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the short- and mid-term outcomes of surgical (SUR) vs. transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defect (ASD) using Amplatzer septal occluder (ASO) in adults with a very similar spectrum of the disease; and to identify predictors for the primary end point.

DESIGN

Single-center, concurrent comparative study. Surgically treated patients were randomly matched (2:1) by age, sex, date of procedure, ASD size, and hemodynamic profile.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-two concurrent patients with ASD submitted to ASO (n = 54) or SUR closure (n = 108) according with their preferences.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end point was a composite index of major events including failure of the procedure, important bleeding, critical arrhythmias, serious infections, embolism, or any major cardiovascular intervention-related complication. Predictors of these major events were investigated.

RESULTS

Atrial septal defects were successfully closed in all patients, and there was no mortality. The primary event rate was 13.2% in ASO vs. 25.0% in SUR (P = .001). Multivariate analysis showed that higher rate of events was significantly associated with age >40 years; systemic/pulmonary output ratio <2.1; and systolic pulmonary arterial pressure >50 mm Hg; while in the ASO group the event rate was only associated with the ASD size (>15 cm(2)/m(2); relative risk = 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.01-8.8). There were no differences in the event-free survival curves in adults with ages <40 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy for closure ASD was similar in both groups. The higher morbidity observed in SUR group was observed only in the patients submitted to the procedure with age >40 years. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the ASO group. Surgical closure is a safe and effective treatment, especially in young adults. There is certainly nothing wrong with continuing to do surgery in countries where the resources are limited.