Surgical Versus Percutaneous Closure of PDA in Preterm Infants: Procedural Charges and Outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Studies comparing percutaneous closure of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) with surgical ligation tend to exclude premature infants and have not assessed procedural charges. We compared our contemporary outcomes and charges of device closure to surgical ligation of PDA in preterm infants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Preterm infants who underwent isolated PDA closure during their newborn hospitalization (January 2014 to September 2017) were grouped based on intention to treat (surgery versus device closure). Patient demographics, procedural details, and immediate postprocedural outcomes were compared. Procedural charges for device closure versus surgical ligation were compared. RESULTS: Compared with the device group (n = 33), patients undergoing surgical ligation (n = 39) were younger, smaller, and required more preoperative support (P < 0.05). The procedure time was shorter for surgical ligation (P < 0.01). Although there was no procedural mortality in either group, the complication rate was higher for device closure than for surgical ligation (15.2% versus 0%; P = 0.02). The proportion of patients returning to preprocedural respiratory support by 48 h after procedure was similar. There was a higher proportion of surgical patients who required increased inotropic support in the first 24 h after procedure (P = 0.19). The procedural charges for transcatheter device closure were twice as expensive as those for surgical ligation. CONCLUSIONS: In our early experience with percutaneous PDA closure, we found a percutaneous approach in preterm infants feasible and well tolerated. Both surgical ligation and device closure were associated with perioperative or postoperative complications. Procedural charges were higher for percutaneous closure, driven by device charge and catheterization room utilization. Further investigation is needed to establish guidelines for first-line therapy for PDA closure in preterm infants, including cost-benefit analysis.
Kim, HS; Schechter, MA; Manning, PB; Eghtesady, P; Balzer, DT; Shahanavaz, S; Rockefeller, TA; Abarbanell, AM
Volume / Issue
Start / End Page
Pubmed Central ID
Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)