International survey reveals variability in PDA stenting practices among pediatric cardiologists, indicating the need for standardized guidelines.
Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) stenting has become an accepted alternative to the modified Blalock–Taussig–Thomas shunt (mBTTS) for duct-dependent pulmonary blood flow (DDPBF). However, several key aspects of practice, including prostaglandin (PGE) titration, antiplatelet therapy, access strategy, back-up planning, and hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) palliation, remain highly variable. We conducted an international web-based survey of interventional pediatric cardiologists. Domains included PGE management, antiplatelet therapy, platelet function testing, stent-length selection, ECMO and surgical back-up, carotid access, complication profile. A total of 138 respondents participated. PGE strategies varied widely: in single-source pulmonary blood flow, 40% used saturation-guided titration, and 29% routinely discontinued PGE; in dual-source circulation, 40% always discontinued PGE and 34% used titration-based strategies. Aspirin monotherapy (46%) and dual antiplatelet therapy (45%) were equally used; clopidogrel doses typically approximated 0.2 mg/kg/day. Platelet function testing was rarely used (19%). Stent-length selection relied on straight-line measurement in 41% and tortuous central-line measurement in 39%. ECMO support was never available in 35% of centers, selectively available in 23%, and always available in 21%. A surgeon was routinely on standby in 48%. Carotid access was used percutaneously by 45% and surgically by 24%. Complications encountered by operators at any stage during their performing these procedures included ductal spasm (87%), thrombosis (51%), LPA “shut-down” (36%), and ductal dissection (33%). Contemporary PDA-stent practice varies markedly across institutions, particularly regarding PGE management, antiplatelet therapy, technical strategy, and back-up planning. HLHS and interstage practices show similar heterogeneity. These findings support the need for multicenter registries and consensus recommendations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McMahon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: