Transesophageal echocardiography‐guided versus fluoroscopy‐guided patent foramen ovale closure: A single center registry

Background Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is conventionally performed under continuous transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance. We aimed to evaluate whether a simplified procedural approach, including pure fluoroscopy‐guidance and final TEE control, as well as an aimed ‘next‐day‐discharge’ is comparable with the conventional TEE‐guided procedure in terms of periprocedural and intermediate‐term outcomes. Methods All patients who underwent a PFO closure at our center between 2010 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Prior to June 2019 cases were performed with continuous TEE guidance (TEE‐guided group). Since June 2019, only pure fluoroscopy‐guided PFO closures have been performed with TEE insertion and control just prior to device release (fluoroscopy‐guided group). We analyzed procedural aspects, as well as long term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. Results In total 291 patients were included in the analysis: 197 in the TEE‐guided group and 94 in the fluoroscopy‐guided group. Fluoroscopy‐guided procedures were markedly shorter (48 ± 20 min vs. 25 ± 9 min; p