Key result
Percutaneous closure of post-MI VSR emerges as a surgical alternative that may lower mortality.
Why the study?
Does percutaneous closure improve survival compared to surgical management in patients with post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture?
Does percutaneous closure improve survival compared to surgical management in patients with post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture?
Percutaneous closure of post-MI ventricular septal rupture is an emerging alternative to surgery, potentially offering lower mortality, especially when performed >14 days post-MI or in patients unsuitable for surgery.
Percutaneous closure may expand options for high-mortality post-MI VSR; leaves open need for randomized comparisons to surgery.
Ventricular septal rupture remains a rare, but most often lethal, complication of acute myocardial infarction. Current guidelines recommend emergent surgical repair of post-myocardial ventricular septal rupture, with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting as indicated. Though surgery provides improved survival over medical management alone, mortality rates remain up to 60%. With technological advances, percutaneous closure has emerged as an alternative management option. In this review, we address patient selection, timing, success, mortality, and complications of transcatheter post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture closure. Current data reveal a lower mortality as compared to surgical management. The optimal device for closure remains uncertain. Timing of closure >14 days after myocardial infarction appears to be associated with greater procedural success; however, delaying repair introduces a selection bias. Complications include device embolization, arrhythmia, residual shunting, and left ventricular rupture. Overall, a Heart Team approach should be taken when possible before proceeding with transcatheter post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture closure. Emergent percutaneous closure should be considered in patients with large shunt or hemodynamic instability. In relatively stable patients, urgent percutaneous closure should be considered if patients are rendered unsuitable for surgical closure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andersen et al. (2018) conducted a review in Post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture. Percutaneous ventricular septal rupture closure vs. Surgical management was evaluated. Percutaneous closure of post-myocardial infarction ventricular septal rupture is an emerging alternative to surgery that may offer lower mortality, though optimal timing and devices remain uncertain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: