AMPLATZER versus Figulla occluder for transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure

Daniela Trabattoni, Achille Gaspardone, Gregory A. Sgueglia, Franco Fabbiocchi, Gaetano Gioffrè, Piero Montorsi, Giuseppe Calligaris, Maria Iamele, Antonella De Santis, Antonio L. Bartorelli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Aims: The aim of this observational study was to compare acute and 12-month results of percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) with two occluder devices. Methods and results: Between June 2007 and October 2014, 406 consecutive patients (48.1±13.3 years, 243 women) underwent percutaneous PFO closure with either the AMPLATZER (n=179) or the Figulla (n=227) device after a stroke or a transient ischaemic attack ascribed to the PFO. A right-to-left shunt grade >1 was previously detected in all patients and atrial septal aneurysm was present in 111 (27.5%) patients. Patients were followed up with a contrast transthoracic echocardiogram and clinically at 24 hours, six months, and 12 months after the procedure. A high procedural success was observed in both groups. Despite a trend towards a higher incidence of acute residual shunt immediately after device deployment among Figulla occluder patients, a residual grade >2 right-to-left shunt was observed in 4.5% of patients, independently of the device used for PFO closure. The only difference reported after Figulla device implantation was a lower rate of supraventricular arrhythmias (9% vs. 17%, p=0.02). Conclusions: According to this two-centre study, PFO closure appears safe and effective with the Figulla occluder as well as with the AMPLATZER device.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2092-2099
Number of pages8
Issue number17
Publication statusPublished - Apr 1 2017


  • Closure devices
  • Patent foramen ovale
  • Percutaneous closure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'AMPLATZER versus Figulla occluder for transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this