Comparison of Three Patent Foramen Ovale Closure Devices in a Randomized Trial (Amplatzer Versus CardioSEAL-STARflex Versus Helex Occluder)
Open Access
- 1 May 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier BV in The American Journal of Cardiology
- Vol. 101 (9), 1353-1358
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.12.040
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cardiac Perforation 6 Weeks After Percutaneous Atrial Septal Defect Repair Using an Amplatzer Septal OccluderPEDIATRICS, 2006
- Late Cardiac Perforation After Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen OvaleThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2006
- Early Cardiac Perforation After Atrial Septal Defect Closure With the Amplatzer Septal OccluderThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2006
- Percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovaleActa Cardiologica, 2005
- Closure of patent foramen ovale: technique, pitfalls, complications, and follow upHeart, 2005
- Transcatheter treatment of atrial septal aneurysm associated with patent foramen ovale for prevention of recurrent paradoxical embolism in high-risk patientsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2005
- Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in patients with paradoxical embolism Periprocedural safety and mid-term follow-up results of three different device occluder systemsPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2004
- Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale: impact of device design on safety and efficacyHeart, 2004
- Recurrent Cerebrovascular Events Associated with Patent Foramen Ovale, Atrial Septal Aneurysm, or BothNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale after presumed paradoxical embolism.Circulation, 1992