The ASD accounts for approximately 6 - 10% of congenital heart diseases. In a review study conducted by van der Linde et al., the incidence of ASD was reported to be 1.64 cases per 1000 live births (
7). Additionally, in another study conducted by Khan et al., about 10% of cases of congenital heart diseases in adults were ASDs (
8). In Iran, studies have also investigated the incidence of this disorder. In a study conducted by Nikyar et al. in Gorgan, the incidence of ASD was reported to be 2.64 cases per 1000 live births (
9).
Ostium secundum ASDs are often suitable for transcatheter procedures. However, percutaneous interventional procedures have limitations, including pulmonary venous occlusion, associated ASD anomalies, proximity of the ASD to the AV, coronary sinus, or venous drainage system, absence of a rim in a significant portion of the ASD, and lesions larger than 35 - 40 mm. The ASD device closure, when performed by an experienced practitioner, has very few complications, including device embolization, atrial arrhythmias, stroke, rupture, and thrombus formation in less than 1% of patients. In fact, ASD device closure is successful in improving functional class and exercise capacity.
In the past, open surgery was used to treat large ASDs. The first successful ASD device closure was performed by King et al. in 1976. This procedure was a great alternative to surgical treatment because it eliminated the need for thoracotomy, open-heart surgery with cardioplegia, and cardiopulmonary bypass. Other benefits of this method include reduced hospital stay, no post-surgical scars, reduced post-surgical pain, and a reduced incidence of dysrhythmias due to the absence of atrial scars (
6-
9).
Studies have shown that improvement in RV function and performance is achieved after ASD closure by transcatheter and surgical methods. However, complete information on the effect on LV function and other echocardiographic findings is not available, and LV and RV diastolic function remains uncertain. The effect of ASD closure on left atrial (LA) size is also unclear because a large LA can cause atrial dysrhythmias, atrial fibrillation (AF), stroke, and even death. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of ASD device closure on functional and echocardiographic findings with long-term follow-up.
The results of the present study showed that significant improvement in clinical symptoms was achieved during the 3 to 6 months and 12-month follow-up after the procedure in both ASD device closure and ASD surgical closure groups (
9,
10). Most echocardiographic parameters, including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), LV diastolic dysfunction, RV function, LV size, RV size, LA size, RA size, MR, TR, and systolic PAP, were significantly improved during the 3 to 6 months and 12-month follow-up in the ASD device closure group. However, in the ASD surgical closure group, only RV size and systolic PAP were significantly improved during the 3 to 6 months and 12-month follow-up.
These findings have also been reported in other studies investigating the therapeutic outcomes of ASD closure. For example, in a study conducted by Dhillon et al., all echocardiographic parameters increased equally in both the device and surgical groups (
10). In a study conducted by Cheung et al., RV dysfunction was reported after ASD surgical closure, whereas RV function improved after ASD device closure (
11).
Also, in a study by Hanseus et al., ASD device closure improved RV function (
12). The results of the study by Hajizeinali et al. showed that left and RV function improved more in patients who underwent ASD device closure than in those who underwent surgery (
13). The results of the study by Fang et al. indicated that the severity of TR decreased more after ASD device closure than after surgery (
14). Salehiam et al. (as cited by Oechslin et al.) demonstrated in a study that ASD device closure improved RV and LV function and reduced LA size, which was associated with improved patient function (
15). In a study conducted by Erwin Stroker et al., it was shown that ASD device closure improves the functional class, reduces RV size, reduces systolic pulmonary artery pressure (SPAP), increases LV size, and increases the E/A ratio (
16).
In the studies by Salehian et al. (
17), Teo et al. (
18), and Poorzand et al. (
19), a significant decrease in RV size, RA size, and PAP before and after surgery was noted. This finding can be justified considering the removal of the left-to-right shunt after surgery and, as a result, the reduction in blood flow to the right heart.
It is very important to follow up and care for these patients, and if care is provided appropriately, treatment will have a more favorable outcome (
20-
22). Proper follow-up can also increase the level of knowledge and attitude of patients, allowing them to participate actively in their own care (
22-
24).
5.1. Conclusions
In general, the device method leads to an improvement in clinical symptoms, although echocardiographic parameters improved more in the ASD device closure group. Therefore, in second-order ASD that meets the conditions for intrusion, the choice of device closure is preferable to open-heart surgery.