Key result
Intracardiac echocardiography guidance for OS-ASD closure significantly reduced median fluoroscopy time (8.4 vs 11.7 min, p<.001) and procedure time (43 vs 94 min, p<.001) compared to TEE.
Why the study?
The study aimed to evaluate fluoroscopy time, procedure time, safety, and efficacy of intracardiac echocardiography versus transesophageal echocardiography guidance for transcatheter closure of ostium secundum atrial septal defect.
Does intracardiac echocardiography guidance reduce fluoroscopy and procedure time compared to transesophageal echocardiography in patients undergoing transcatheter closure of ostium secundum atrial septal defect?
Cohort (n=90)
Does intracardiac echocardiography guidance reduce fluoroscopy and procedure time compared to transesophageal echocardiography in patients undergoing transcatheter closure of ostium secundum atrial septal defect?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.4% vs 11.7%
p-value: p=<.001
ICE guidance for transcatheter closure of OS-ASD significantly reduces fluoroscopy and procedure times compared to TEE, with comparable safety and efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
ICE guidance linked to shorter times may reduce radiation; leaves open need for randomized outcome trials.
Cillis et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Ostium Secundum Atrial Septal Defect (OS-ASD) (n=90). Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) vs. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was evaluated on fluoroscopy time (FT) in minutes (p=<.001). Intracardiac echocardiography guidance for OS-ASD closure significantly reduced median fluoroscopy time (8.4 vs 11.7 min, p<.001) and procedure time (43 vs 94 min, p<.001) compared to TEE.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: