Key result
BioSTAR provided a similar long-term effective patent foramen ovale closure rate compared to the Amplatzer PFO occluder beyond 2 years (92% vs. 96%; p=1.00).
Why the study?
PFO closure with a biodegradable device is an attractive alternative to permanent devices, but long-term effectiveness and morphology after biodegradation remain unknown.
Does PFO closure with the BioSTAR biodegradable device provide similar long-term effective closure compared to the Amplatzer PFO occluder?
Cohort (n=97)
Does PFO closure with the BioSTAR biodegradable device provide similar long-term effective closure compared to the Amplatzer PFO occluder?
Absolute Event Rate: 92% vs 96%
p-value: p=1.00
The BioSTAR biodegradable device provides similar long-term PFO closure rates to the Amplatzer occluder, but is associated with unique structural issues such as strut protrusion and peri-device shunts.
May support BioSTAR as PFO closure alternative; leaves open need for randomized trials.
OBJECTIVES: To compare transesophageal echocardiography (TOE) findings after patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure by BioSTAR (NMT Medical Inc, Boston, MA) and Amplatzer PFO occluders (Abbott Vascular, Plymouth, MN). BACKGROUND: PFO closure with a biodegradable device represents an attractive alternative to permanent devices. Long-term effectiveness and morphology after biodegradation remain unknown. METHODS: Between February 2008 and June 2014, 49 patients received BioSTAR and 48 Amplatzer PFO occluder. TOE was performed after closure, at 6 months and beyond 2 years. RESULTS: PFO features were comparable between the groups. Immediate effective closure (<5 bubbles on Valsalva) was obtained in 96% by BioSTAR and 88% by Amplatzer PFO occluder (p = .16). Except for transient fever after BioSTAR (10.8 vs. 0%; p = .08), there was no adverse events. TOE at 6 months revealed comparable effective closure (93 vs. 89%; p = .74), all devices in correct position and no thrombus/pericardial effusion. In the BioSTAR group, a peri-device left-to-right color Doppler shunt was documented in one patient (2.2%), protrusion of the nitinol framework strut(s) into the atrial cavity in two patients (4.3%), and both events in one patient (2.2%). TOE beyond 2 years showed comparable effective closure (92 vs. 96%; p = 1.00) and again BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion. There was no stroke or peripheral embolization in either group while TIA was numerically greater in BioSTAR patients (6.8 vs. 2.5%; p = .61). CONCLUSION: BioSTAR provided similar PFO closure rate as Amplatzer PFO occluder. As yet unreported BioSTAR-associated peri-device left-to-right shunt and metal framework strut(s) protrusion may have practical implications for further development of biodegradable devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Šuligoj et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Patent foramen ovale (n=97). BioSTAR PFO occluder vs. Amplatzer PFO occluder was evaluated on Effective closure beyond 2 years (p=1.00). BioSTAR provided a similar long-term effective patent foramen ovale closure rate compared to the Amplatzer PFO occluder beyond 2 years (92% vs. 96%; p=1.00).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: