key: cord-0997702-93xcgbw9
authors: Goldberg, Steven L.; Don, Creighton W.
title: The ongoing - and resurgent - Challenge of post-infarct ventricular septal defect management
date: 2020-07-06
journal: Cardiovasc Revasc Med
DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.06.033
sha: 41acdcb1ca09faf4cbbbec9c88a5833b63bc6426
doc_id: 997702
cord_uid: 93xcgbw9

nan

J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f A curious, but important, collateral impact of the shelter-in-place requirements occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic has been the reduction in patients presenting with acute vascular events such as myocardial infarctions and cerebrovascular accidents. This has likely led to increased out-of-hospital mortality 1 , but also likely late-term complications in survivors. One of these late-term post-myocardial infarction complications is the development of a post-infarct ventricular septal defect (VSD), and there have been whisperings that these have been seen more commonly during the pandemic 2 . Therefore, it is timely to have an article re-assessing the management of patients with a post-infarct VSD, particularly with respect to the appropriate timing of closure Heckle and colleagues 3 review the published retrospective case studies of percutaneous closures of VSDs, and compare outcomes when the repair was done within 14 days of diagnosis versus later. As the authors acknowledge, without randomization it is impossible to know whether such findings are the result of the specific treatment strategy, or are due to patient confounders, including survival and selection biases. Nevertheless, this study is informative in providing a summary of current outcomes of this uncommon, but potentially lifesaving procedure.

The current report reiterates the findings of prior percutaneous and surgical studies, that early closure of post-infarct VSDs is consistently shown to be associated with higher mortality than later attempts 4, 5 . Certainly, waiting at least 14 days will lead to a lower procedural mortality due to survival biases, but that does not mean it is safe to wait those 14 Journal Pre-proof J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f days, as some patients may require something to be done early in order to survive. Although the incidence of initial cardiogenic shock was similar between the two groups, the amount of left to right shunting was dramatically different between the two groups, pointing to the fact that the patients treated earlier were sicker. Furthermore, patients who presented later actually had no evidence for left to right shunting, raising the question as to what the clinical indications for closure in those individuals were who proved themselves as survivors.

Although not formally studied, it is hoped that intervening early may attenuate the increased risk of the left to right shunt exacerbating a myocardial infarction with subsequent ventricular dysfunction. It also may theoretically reduce the stress on the friable tissue, limiting further tearing. It has also been suggested that percutaneous VSD closure may be preferable to surgery for stabilizing patients, by avoiding the risks of cardiopulmonary bypass and the challenges of surgical repair in the early stages of the VSD presentation. In some patients, the optimal management of a post-infarct VSD may best be considered as a staged proceduredevice closure or surgery (possibly with concomitant CABG), followed some time later with the alternative to complete the closure. It is tempting to consider using a percutaneous ventricular assist device as a means to unload the ventricle while providing time for tissue healing and delay percutaneous or surgical VSD repair 6, 7 , but this requires independent testing.

It is well known that surgical VSD repair is associated with much greater success when it is done after some time has passed to allow for healing (and to "weed out" the patients who are most likely to die early) 4 . Not surprisingly, with percutaneous closure as well, the outcomes are better when the procedure can be delayed. In fact, the mortality rates in the study by Heckle and colleagues are not terribly different than what has been reported for J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f surgery 4 . Much of this is for the reason described above -the worse cases will die early -the stronger survive. If a patient can survive 14 days, they are less likely to die from the defect, or following the VSD closure, and the closure can be done to reduce the hemodynamic impact of the shunt -which can include left ventricular dilation and volume overload with congestive heart failure, as well as increasing pulmonary artery pressures.

Early intervention carries the disadvantage that the defect may extend spontaneously or as a result of the procedure, as has been observed with surgical repair. Surgeons typically describe the tissue as being extremely friable early after the VSD develops, but less so with late repairs 8 . The previously published pooled analysis by Schlotter and colleagues showed a strong association between early percutaneous VSD closure ≤ 14 days and higher mortality 5 , which is consistent with the finding in this current update. What these studies do not provide are guidance for clinicians as to the optimal timing for intervention.

In considering the likelihood of benefit of early percutaneous closure, it is important to be aware of the serious potential complications. Aside from the usual risks of vascular access and contrast administration, it may be possible to extend the defect, or otherwise cause tearing of the fragile myocardial tissues, due to tension during the procedure, or from the device. Many operators will adopt a strategy of placing the largest possible device-either an off-label atrial septal occluder device or the HDE approved post-infarct VSD device, (which is made in larger sizes than the FDA approved congenital VSD occluder devices) but which may increase tension

Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest during the Covid-19

Outbreak in Italy

Delayed STEMI Presentation During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Outcomes of Early Versus Delayed Transcatheter Closure of Post-Myocardial Infarction Ventricular Septal Defect

Surgical repair of ventricular septal defect after myocardial infarction: outcomes from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database

Interventional postmyocardial infarction ventricular septal defect closure: a systematic review of current evidence

Early cardiac unloading with ImpellaCP in acute myocardial infarction with ventricular septal defect

Impella-assisted transcatheter closure of an acute postinfarction ventricular septal defect

Timing & Prognosis of Post Infarct Ventricular Septal Repair: a Re-look at Old Dogmas

Immediate primary transcatheter closure of postinfarction ventricular septal defects