ArticleHeart and vessels2019
Collateral closure in congenital heart defects with Amplatzer vascular plugs: single-center experience and a simplified delivery technique for exceptional cases.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcatheter Embolization in Congenital Cardiovascular Malformations-Variable Use of Vascular Plugs.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study describes our experience with Amplatzer Vascular Plugs (AVP2 and 4) and highlights a more refindes telescopic technique for AVP2 delivery. AVPs are well-established occlusion devices for vascular anomalies in congenital heart disease (CHD). The AVP2 is sometimes preferred to the AVP4 due to its shorter length, flat-profiled retention disks, and the availability of larger diameters, but its profile requires a larger inner lumen for safe delivery. The latter may actually hamper access to target lesions. This is a retrospective analysis of all CHD patients treated with the AVP2 and AVP4 between 12/2012 and 12/2015. Target vessels were characterized, measured, and the device-to-vessel diameter ratio calculated. A modified pigtail technique for AVP2 delivery was frequently used: a floppy wire was simply reinforced by the curved tip of a pigtail catheter (instead of the long sheath's dilator) to guide the required delivery sheath towards the desired landing zone. 59 patients with a median age and bodyweight of 3.0 years (range 0.1-75) and 13.8 kg (range 2.5-80) underwent the implantation of 106 plug-devices (30 AVP2, 76 AVP4) in 91 target vessels. Indications for their use were ductus arteriosus (19%), aortopulmonary (43%) as well as venovenous collaterals (34%) and other miscellaneous lesions (4%). The pigtail-supported AVP2 delivery in six patients proved very convenient. No complications occurred. AVPs are excellent devices for embolizing shunt vessels in CHD patients. Here, we describe a simplified telescoping technique for AVP2 delivery to enter curvy target lesions gently and efficiently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.