Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T22:19:59.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of the morphology of the oval fossa for placement of devices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2008

Gian Paolo Ussia
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Division of Cardiac Surgery, Hesperia Hospital, Modena, Italy and Instituto Clinica Pediatrica Polidinico, University Of Messina, Italy;
Tarek S. Momenah
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatric Cardiology and Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
Phillip Ursell
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatric Cardiology and Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
Mike M. Brook
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatric Cardiology and Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
Philip Moore
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatric Cardiology and Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
Francesco De Luca
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Division of Cardiac Surgery, Hesperia Hospital, Modena, Italy and Instituto Clinica Pediatrica Polidinico, University Of Messina, Italy;
Norman H. Silverman
Affiliation:
Departments of Pediatric Cardiology and Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

Abstract

Objectives

First, to examine the morphology of heart specimens with defects of the oval fossa so as to define the factors that facilitate appropriate selection of the size of devices used for inteventional closure. Second, to examine the relationship between morphology and transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography.

Background

The success of transcatheter closure is influenced by the variable morphology of deficiencies with the oval fossa, and of the relationship of the fossa itself to adjacent structures. More appropriate selection could reduce the incidence of failures.

Methods

From over 100 specimens in the cardiac registry at the University of California, San Francisco, we judged 16 hearts with atrial septal defects within the oval fossa, either in isolation or associated with other cardiac malformation, to be suitable for this study. We measured the dimensions of the defect and the surrounding rims of the fossa. All values were normalized to the diameter of the aortic root.

Results

A fenestrated defect was present in 9 specimens (56%). The shape defect itself was oval in all specimens, with a ratio of major to minor axes of 1.70 ± 0.63– The major axis took one of three main directions with respect to the vertical plane: in 11 specimens (69%) it was at horizontal; in 3 (19%) it was at oblique at an angle of 45 degrees; and in 2 (12%) it was vertical. Discordance was noted in some hearts between the major axis of the defect and that of the oval fossa. Structures closest to the rim of the fossa were the aortic mound, the coronary sinus, and the hinge point of the aortic leaflet of the mitral valve.

Conclusions

Extrapolating from these specimens permitted identification of the major and minor axes of the atrial septal defect by transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography. Our study has identified landmarks and dimensions that may be employed to improve effectiveness of selection of patients for transcatheter closure of defects within the oval fossa.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

King, DT, Mills, NL. Non operative closure of atrial septal defect. Surgery 1974; 75: 383ndash;388.Google Scholar
Mills, NLKing, DT. Secundum atrial septal defect—Non–operative closure during cardiac catheterization. JAMA 1976; 235: 25062509.Google Scholar
Lock, JE,Cockerham, JT,Keane, JF,Finley, JP,Wakely, PE,Fellows, ICE. Transcatheter umbrella closure of congenital heart defects. Circulation 1987; 75: 593599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lock, JE,Rome, JJ,Davis, R, Van Praagh, S, Perry, SB, Van Praagh, R, Keane, JF. Transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect, experimental studies. Circulation 1989; 79: 10911099CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Das, GS, Voss, G, Jarvis, G, Wyche, K, Gunther, R,Wilson, R. Experimental atrial septal defect closure with a new transcatheter self–centering device. Circulation 1993; 88: 17541764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rao, PS, Sideris, EB, Hausdorf, G, Rey, C, Lloyd, TR, Beekman, RH, Worms, AM, Bourlon, F, Onorato, E, Khalilullah, M, Haddad, J. International experience with secundum atrial septal defect occlusion ythe buttoned device. Am Heart J 1994; 128: 10221035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sievert, H, Babic, UU, Enssien, R,Scherer, D, Spies, H, Wiederspahn, T, Zeplin, HE. Transcatheter closure of large atrial septal defect s with the Babic system. Cath Cardiovasc Diagn 1995; 36: 232236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masura, J, Gavora, P,Formanek, A,Hijazi, ZM. Transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defects using the new selfcentering amplatzer septal occluder–initial human experience. Cath Cardiovasc Diagn 1997; 42: 388393.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, SMAG., Ho, YS, Anderson, RH. Morphological study of defects of the atrial septum within the oval fossa: implicationsfor transcatheter closure of left-to-right shunt. Br Heart J 1992; 67: 316320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, CK, Godman, MJ. Morphological variations of fossa ovalis atrial septal defects (secundum): feasibility for transcutaneous closure with the clam-shell device. Br Heart J 1993; 69: 5255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iishii, M, Kato, H, Inoue, O, Takagi, J, Maeno, J, Sugimura, T, Miyake, T, Kumate, M, Kosuga, K, Ohishi, K. Biplane transesophageal echo–Doppler studies of atrial septal defects: quantitative evaluation and monitoring for Transcatheter closure. Am Heart 1993; 125: 13631368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanMeurs, VanWoezik, H, Krediet, P. Measurement of the ascending aorta in infants and children: comparison with other aortic dimension. J Anat 1982; 135: 273279.Google Scholar
Rome, JJ, Keane, JF, Perry, SB, Spevak, FJ, Lock, JE. Double umbrella closure of atrial septal defect – initial clinical application Circulation 1990; 82: 751758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boutin, c, Musewe, NN, Smallhorm, JF, Dyck, JD, Kobayashi, T, Benson, LN. Echocardiographic follow–up of atrial septal defect catheter closure by double–umbrella device. Circulation 1993; 88: 621627.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenfield, HM, vanderVelde, ME, Sanders, SP, Colan, SD, Parness, IA, Lock, JE, Spevak, PJ. Echocardiographic predictors of candidacy for successful transcatheter atrial septal defect closure. Cath Cardiovasc Diagn 1995; 34: 2934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prieto, RL, Foreman, Ck, Cheatham, JP, Latson, LA. Intermediate–term outcome of transcatheter secundum atrial septal defect closure using the Bard clamshell sepral umbrella Am Heart J 1996; 13101312.Google Scholar
Jussto, RN, Nykanen, DG, Boutin, C, NcCrindle, BW, Freedom, RM, Benson, L. Clinical impact of transcatheter closure of secundum atrial septal defects with the double umbrella device. Am J Cardiol 1996; 77: 889892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, JD, Prieto, LR, Lamorgese, T,Lason, LA. Echocardiographic assessment of residual leak location following transcatheter atrial septal defect closure with the Cardioseal occlusion device. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1998; 11: 505(abstr.).Google Scholar
Maeno, YV, Benson, LN, Boutin, C. Impact of dynamic 3D transesophageal echocardiography in the assessment of atrial septal defects and occlusion by the double–umbrella device(CardioSEAL)Cardiol Young 1998; 8: 368378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed