Page 9 - Journal of Structural Heart Disease Volume 3, Issue 1

Original Scienti c Article 2
Table 1. Comparative table showing characteristics of available Occlutech Duct Occluder devices (manufacturer data).
Shank Type
Introducing System Size (mm)
Aortic Shank Diameter (mm)
Pulmonic Shank Diameter (mm)
Retention Disc Diameter (mm)
Length (mm)
Standard shank 6 Standard shank 6 Standard shank 6 Standard shank 6 Standard shank 7 Standard shank 7 Standard shank 8 Standard shank 9 Long shank 6 Long shank 6 Long shank 6 Long shank 6 Long shank 7
mm = millimeters.
retention disc, and is attached to its delivery cable using a screw cap mechanism. Both devices have comparable designs; however, the ODO has a waist that is wider at its pulmonary end than at its aortic end with the purpose of achieving a more stable im- plant. Moreover, to facilitate use in longer PDAs, the
The Device
The ODO device is made of braided Nitinol threads. Nitinol is a very elastic metal alloy with memory properties. The ODO consists of an aortic disc connected to a cone-shaped shank (Figure 1). Compared with the ADO I device, the direction of the ODO conical body is inverted. The proximal end of the shank (i.e., pulmonic end) has a diameter that is 1.5–2.0 mm larger than that of its aortic end, and the retention disc has a diameter that exceeds the size of the aortic end of the shank by 5.5–8.0 mm. The ODO is available in several sizes, each with a standard (i.e., short) or long shank (Table 1). Polyethylene patches inside the device support immediate closure of the defect. The device is attached to a delivery cable by a screw that, after detachment, protrudes from the pulmonary end of the device to allow easier snaring if retrieval is required. Before January 2015, and because the ODO did not yet have a dedi-
3.5 5 9 4.25 4 6 10 5.00 5 7 11 6.05 6 8 13 6.30 8 10 16 7.00 10 12 18 12.00 12 15 20 14.00 14 18 24 16.00 3.5 5 9 7.00 4 6 10 7.50 5 7 11 8.50 6 8 13 9.00 8 10 16 10.50
Figure 1.
The Occlutech Duct Occluder device (as shown on occlutech.com).
ODO is available in two di erent lengths.
The objective of this study was to investigate the
safety, e cacy, and clinical utility of the ODO device.
Materials and Methods
The ODO was introduced to our catheterization unit in Au- gust 2013. Since then, our policy has been to prioritize its use over other existing devices in patients with isolated PDA who weigh ≥6 kg to test its safety and e cacy. We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent a PDA closure attempt with the ODO between August 2013 and October 2015.
Journal of Structural Heart Disease, February 2017
Volume 3, Issue 1:1-7