LAUSR

BACKGROUND Ceraflex septal occluder and the Figulla atrial septal defect occluder have the advantage of a pivoting mechanism and softer device architecture. This study sought to examine the safety and efficacy of these occluders compared to the Amplatzer septal occluder. METHODS This was a retrospective study. Between January, 2013 and April, 2020, patients with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Early and late-onset outcomes were examined. RESULTS Four hundred seven patients (range: 0.17-70.72 years; 53.1% >18 years; male: 29.2%) underwent atrial septal defect occlusion using Amplatzer septal occluder (n = 313), Ceraflex septal occluder (n = 36) and FSO (n = 58). A longer procedure time was observed in the Amplatzer septal occluder group. Early-onset complication rates in Amplatzer septal occluder, Ceraflex septal occluder and Figulla atrial septal defect occluder were 3.83%, 5.56% and 0%. Ten (2.46%) patients developed delayed complications (2.56%, 0% and 1.72% in the Amplatzer septal occluder, Ceraflex septal occluder and Figulla atrial septal defect occluder groups). Device erosion rate was not different between groups. The occlusion rates were comparable among all the devices. CONCLUSION There is no significant difference in safety and efficacies between the novel atrial septal defect occluding devices compared to Amplatzer septal occluder.