Early safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage suture ligation: results from the U.S. transcatheter LAA ligation consortium

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Management of Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a substantially higher risk of thromboembolism, particularly stroke events, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Oral anticoagulation (OAC), while effective in reducing embolic events in AF patients, is associated with an increased bleeding risk. Thus, not all patients with AF are candidates for OAC and some are only candidates for OAC in the short term. Of the available nonpharmacologic strategies for the management of AF, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as a potential approach for reducing the risk of systemic thromboembolism in AF patients eligible for OAC. LAAO can be achieved either surgically or percutaneously using an epicardial, endocardial, or a combined approach. Although available data are limited, currently available LAAO devices, and those being developed, have shown promise in reducing bleeding risk in AF patients because of the reduced overall need for anticoagulation, while maintaining efficacy in preventing thromboembolism. The optimal device will reduce both embolic and hemorrhagic strokes, and other bleeds, with a high implant success rate and a low complication rate. Until that time, anticoagulation remains the gold standard that these devices strive to surpass, and thus LAAO devices are currently indicated in patients with relative contraindication to OAC therapy.

Left Atrial Appendages Occlusion: Current Status and Prospective

Stroke continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) provides protection against stroke and peripheral embolization in AF but significant proportion of patients could not be started on anticoagulation because of bleeding complications. Left atrial appendage harbors clot in about 90% of nonvalvular AF. The advent of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) techniques has provided these patients with alternative to OAC for stroke prophylaxis. Multiple LAAO devices are currently available with Watchman and Amulet being the most commonly used in clinical practice. Randomized studies are available for Watchman device only. Data on Amplatzer Cardiac Plug, Amulet and Lariat devices are limited by the paucity of randomized data. Long-term data on different LAAO techniques are showing promising results. Device related thrombosis continues to be a serious complication associated with LAAO. Future studies should look into comparative effectiveness between different LAAO techniques, optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after LAAO. This article aims to provide current available evidence on efficacy and safety of different LAAO devices and future prospective.

Cardiovascular Therapies Targeting Left Atrial Appendage

Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has evolved as an effective strategy for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation who are considered suitable for oral anticoagulation. There is strong evidence based on randomized clinical trials with 1 percutaneous device, as well as a large registry experience with several devices, regarding the safety and efficacy of this strategy. In addition, there is encouraging data regarding the effect of epicardial LAA closure on decreasing arrhythmia burden and improvements in systemic homeostasis by neurohormonal modulation. However, there are several unresolved issues regarding optimal patient selection, device selection, management of periprocedural complications including device-related thrombus, residual leaks, and pericarditis. In this review, we summarize the rationale, evidence, optimal patient selection, and common challenges encountered with mechanical LAA exclusion.

LARIAT Trial Updates

The thrombus formed within the LAA is responsible for the vast (about 90%) majority of strokes. Anticoagulation, although effective therapy for stroke prevention is not feasible in a significant minority of patients due to various reasons. Two percutaenous LAA exclusion techniques have been developed in an effort to decrease risk for stroke: endocardial closure/plugging of the LAA (Watchman, Amplatzer devices) and epicardial LAA ligation (LARIAT). The aim of this study is to review the trial data to date for the LARIAT device. The LARIAT suture has been used in more than 4500 patients with high success of LAA complete closure (92-100%), mostly in the patients unable to take anticoagulation and in a small minority as antiarrhythmic option. The LARIAT technique has evolved with a change in pericardial access method that resulted in dramatic improvement of safety. LAA closure performance with LARIAT system seems to be similar to Watchman device, with small leaks during follow-up in 6-24% of the cases, which do not to correlate with thrombo-embolic events. LAA has been proven to play an important triggering role in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation. Small studies had shown that LAA ligation with LARIAT could terminate persistent atrial fibrillation and possible improve ablation success. Ongoing aMAZE randomized trial is studying if LAA ligaiton using LARIAT suture leads to improved atrial fibrillation ablation success. Available data suggests that LAA closure using LARIAT epicardial suture is a good alternative for stroke risk reduction in patients who are unable to be on anticoagulation therapy. LARIAT system might improve success of AF ablation for patients with persistent and long persistent AF, pending the results of the ongoing aMAZE trial.

Left atrial appendage occlusion: rationale, evidence, devices, and patient selection

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a worldwide epidemic associated with significant morbidity and mortality, often due to disabling or fatal thromboembolic stroke. Oral anticoagulation is highly effective at preventing ischaemic stroke and improving all-cause survival in patients with non-valvular AF. Despite the efficacy of oral anticoagulation, many patients are not treated due to either absolute or perceived contraindications to therapy, including bleeding. Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has emerged as a mechanical alternative to pharmacologic stroke prevention. Initial and mid-term clinical trial data suggest that LAA closure is safe, with less intracranial bleeding, and a net clinical benefit that appears to be non-inferior to oral anticoagulation. However, concern remains over the possible increased risk of ischaemic stroke in long-term follow-up. Careful patient selection for LAA closure is paramount. Patients with prior intracranial bleeding or recurrent serious bleeding who are not eligible for long-term oral anticoagulation are typical candidates for LAA closure; however, other populations may benefit as well, such as patients with end-stage renal disease. Clinical investigation and randomized trials are needed to clarify the best methods of LAA occlusion, optimal pharmacologic strategies in the short-term after LAA closure, and to identify patient populations who will derive the most benefit from LAA occlusion. In this article, we review the rationale for LAA closure, the currently available devices and their evidence base, patient selection, challenges in management, and future directions for LAA closure science.

Current State of Left Atrial Appendage Closure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained arrhythmia, is a major cause of stroke and systemic embolism, and is increasing in prevalence. Device closure of the left atrial appendage (LAA) represents a non-pharmacologic approach to stroke prevention in AF patients. This review presents the rationale for LAA closure (LAAC), describes current transcatheter approaches to LAAC, and summarizes the current evidence for LAAC for stroke prevention, highlighting the main randomized trials and the most recent data available.

RECENT FINDINGS

Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials demonstrates similar rates of all-cause stroke with transcatheter LAAC compared with vitamin K antagonist therapy and significantly less bleeding with LAAC after cessation of mandated post-procedure pharmacology. Recent prospective observational studies, including those evaluating outcomes after commercial approval in the USA, show significantly improved procedure safety compared with earlier experiences. LAAC appears to be an attractive alternative strategy for stroke prevention in AF patients, particularly in those who can take short-term oral anticoagulation (OAC), but are not optimal candidates for long-term OAC. Recent data suggests the procedure can be safely performed in patients with contraindications to OAC. Further, robust studies are needed to evaluate safety and efficacy in OAC-contraindicated patients, to compare outcomes with non-vitamin K antagonist OACs, and to explore the relative safety and efficacy of different LAAC devices.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: What Are the Options and Where is the Evidence?

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an effective site-directed therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) for stroke prevention, who are ineligible for long-term oral anticoagulation. The objective of this study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and availability of LAAO devices by reviewing the literature and to review the development and effectiveness of LAAO by the transcatheter approach with plugging devices such as WATCHMAN™ (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA); AMPLATZER™ Cardiac Plug and AMPLATZER™ Amulet™ (Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA); and the LARIAT® Suture Delivery Device (SentreHEART, Redwood City, CA, USA), which features an entirely unique hybrid (endocardial and epicardial) approach in closing the left atrial appendage (LAA). The conducted literature review ultimately revealed a substantial body of literature supporting the safety and efficacy of various LAAO strategies, including endocardial, epicardial, and hybrid approaches, in AF patients who are not eligible for long-term oral anticoagulant use. Specifically, the most attractive population suitable for LAA closure appears to be patients at high risk for ischemic stroke with a longer life expectancy but a moderate-to-high bleeding risk with long-term oral anticoagulation. The benefit of LAA closure in reducing the incidence of stroke in patients with nonvalvular AF has been evolving gradually, and we are confident that this new field of percutaneous LAA closure will continue to emerge as a game-changer in the treatment of AF.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Data Update

Resection of the left atrial appendage (LAA) to prevent recurrent arterial emboli in patients with atrial fibrillation was first suggested more than 60 years ago. Longer-term follow-up from randomized studies of the safety and efficacy of transcatheter LAA occlusion has recently been completed; data from large, observational cohorts are being reported. These recent data provide further insights into procedural safety with current techniques and the ability of LAA closure to reduce thromboembolic stroke compared with warfarin anticoagulation. This review summarizes the latest data regarding transcatheter LAA occlusion, focusing on larger prospective studies and further analyses of seminal clinical trials.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Non-Valvular AF

The left atrial appendage (LAA) may be involved in offloading atrial pressure during left ventricular systole. As ventricular rate increases, LAA emptying decreases during early diastole causing increased risk of thrombus formation particularly in patients with non-valvular AF (NVAF). The LAA is the site of thrombus formation in more than 90 % of patients with NVAF, so is an important target for thromboembolic prophylaxis in these patients. Anticoagulation therapy is used to treat NVAF, but it has long-term complications and may be contraindicated in some patients. Therefore, alternative strategies to reduce embolic risk in patients with AF have been developed. These include percutaneous, thoracoscopic, and open closure strategies. This study reviews the safety and efficacy of these strategies, comparing these approaches and devices with pharmacological strategies. There is little data to endorse one strategy over another. Given the minimal evidence available, recommendations in support of LAA occlusion remain weak and guidelines have called for more research and coding of endpoints for this emerging technology.

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: is there a Role in Valvular Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation, a chronic and highly morbid cardiovascular condition which affects over 33 million people worldwide, can be broadly categorized as valvular vs non-valvular in etiology. However, definitions of valvular atrial fibrillation have varied widely in the literature, and there is no clear consensus definition to date. Historically, patients with atrial fibrillation in the setting of rheumatic mitral valve disease have constituted a particularly high risk group for cardioembolic stroke, and for this reason many contemporary trials of pharmaceutical and device therapies for atrial fibrillation have systematically excluded patients with valvular heart disease. Therefore, vitamin K antagonism remains the favored approach to mitigate stroke risk in valvular atrial fibrillation, and the optimal strategy to treat atrial fibrillation patients with valvular heart disease who cannot tolerate oral anticoagulation therapy is unknown. Recent trials have demonstrated an important role for percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion devices in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, but the role of these devices in patients with valvular atrial fibrillation is uncertain. Given the worldwide burden of valvular atrial fibrillation, future trials intended to clarify the role of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices in valvular atrial fibrillation should provide important insight for the care of millions of patients.

[Left atrial appendage clusure in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation : Clinical evidence 2017]

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia with a prevalence of 1-2% and affects approximately 15-20% of all octogenarians. Patients are at increased risk of thromboembolic stroke, with an overall risk of 5% per year. Thrombi form almost exclusively in the left atrial appendage (LAA), a blind sac-like heterogeneous structure trabeculated by pectinate muscles. In the past five decades, life-long oral anticoagulation (OAC) with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) has been the state-of-the art treatment to prevent stroke and systemic embolism from thrombi in AF. In the last decade, nonvitamin K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) have been shown to be superior to VKA. Given the safety issues of indefinite OAC with either VKA or NOAC, it is plausible to consider left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) as an alternative strategy to prevent death, stroke or other systemic embolization, and bleeding. In recent years, LAAC has been compared to VKA in prospective randomized trials, yielding superior results regarding efficacy and noninferiority regarding safety in the mid-term. This review provides an update on the current state of LAAC in the field of prevention of death, stroke, and bleedings in patients suffering from nonvalvular AF. We elucidate the evidence and limitations of anticoagulation as the classical treatment paradigm, and review devices and techniques for LAAC. Most importantly, the current clinical evidence on efficacy and safety is outlined.

Leaks after left atrial appendage ligation with Lariat device: Incidence, pathophysiology, clinical implications and methods of closure- A case based discussion

Catheter based left atrial appendage (LAA) closure techniques are emerging as a promising alternative for stroke prevention in patients who cannot tolerate oral anticoagulation. Lariat procedure involves percutaneous catheter based epicardial ligation of the LAA with a suture via an endo-epicardial hybrid approach. It offers the advantage of not leaving behind a focus for thrombus formation or embolization. Similar to surgical ligation of the left atrial appendage, Lariat ligation is limited by leaks in a small percentage of patients. The incidence of leaks is variable and can be seen in the immediate post procedure period or during follow up. The electrical and mechanical implications of leaks are still under debate. In this review, we discuss the incidence, pathophysiology, clinical implications and methods of closure of leaks after Lariat. In the end, we present a case of a Lariat leak closed with an Amplatzer septal occluder.

Incomplete Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage: Implication and Management

Incomplete left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) occurs in ∼30-40 % of cases following both surgical and percutaneous closure methods. Incomplete surgical LAAC may further be classified as incompletely surgically ligated LAA (ISLL) or LAA stump. ISLL is associated with a significantly increased risk of thrombus formation/thromboembolism. Moreover, this risk is highest in the absence of oral anticoagulation (OAC) and inversely correlates with the size of the ISLL neck. Not only routine screening for ISLL seems critical, but also long-term OAC should strongly be considered in this high-risk cohort. Alternatively, complete endocardial occlusion using a surrogate method may represent a reasonable option, particularly in those intolerant to long-term OAC therapy. Although thrombus formation/thromboembolic events have also been described in patients with incomplete LAAC following percutaneous occlusion, an association between the two remains less clear. However, given the rise and growing interest in percutaneous LAAC methods, additional research in this area is clearly warranted.

Pharmacological and Non-pharmacological Treatments for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with significant risk of stroke and other thromboembolic events, which can be effectively prevented using oral anticoagulation (OAC) with either vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban. Until recently, VKAs were the only available means for OAC treatment. NOACs had similar efficacy and were safer than or as safe as warfarin with respect to reduced rates of hemorrhagic stroke or other intracranial bleeding in the respective pivotal randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of stroke prevention in non-valvular AF patients. Increasing “real-world” evidence on NOACs broadly confirms the results of the RCTs. However, individual patient characteristics including renal function, age, or prior bleeding should be taken into account when choosing the OAC with best risk–benefit profile. In patients ineligible for OACs, surgical or interventional stroke prevention strategies should be considered. In patients undergoing cardiac surgery for other reasons, the left atrial appendage excision, ligation, or amputation may be the best option. Importantly, residual stumps or insufficient ligation may result in even higher stroke risk than without intervention. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion, although requiring minimally invasive access, failed to demonstrate reduced ischemic stroke events compared to warfarin. In this review article, we summarize current treatment options and discuss the strengths and major limitations of the therapies for stroke risk reduction in patients with AF.

Managing the Left Atrial Appendage in Atrial Fibrillation: Current State of the Art

BACKGROUND

Patients with atrial fibrillation are at increased risk for thromboembolic stroke originating predominantly in the left atrial appendage. To reduce the risk, the standard of care is anticoagulation. In addition, several devices for exclusion of the left atrial appendage have been developed.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles relevant to left atrial appendage management. The resulting articles were reviewed as were relevant articles in their bibliographies. Relevant journals were manually searched for sources.

RESULTS

Devices are being used for left atrial appendage exclusion by percutaneous and surgical approaches. Their indications, limitations, and outcomes are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

Excision and exclusion of the left atrial appendage is safe and as effective as medical management of atrial fibrillation for stroke prevention. The choice of treatment should be made based on patients' anatomy, history, and preference informed by an appropriate left atrial appendage management team.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a commonly sustained atrial arrhythmia with associated morbidity and mortality. AF is associated with increased risk of thromboembolism and stroke, requiring use of anticoagulation. Anticoagulation decreases the risk of stroke but is associated with a higher risk of bleeding, necessitating discontinuation in some patients. The left atrial appendage is the likely source of thrombus in the majority of patients with AF. This has led to the development of left atrial appendage occlusion as a means to reduce stroke risk in patients who have a contraindication to long-term anticoagulation. Multiple implantable devices have surfaced in the last few years, with some promising prospects. The main purpose of this review is to highlight the indications and use of these devices for left atrial appendage occlusion.

Approaches to Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Device Design, Performance, and Limitations

Up to 6.1 million people in the United States have atrial fibrillation (AF), which is associated with an increased risk of stroke. Oral anticoagulants are the mainstay of stroke prevention in AF. For decades, warfarin was the only available drug, fraught with compliance limitations, a narrow therapeutic window, and a high risk of hemorrhage. Pharmacologic developments have produced new anticoagulants that have improved the rates of stroke related to AF; however, they still confer a high risk of bleeding, making them unsuitable for some patients. Studies have shown that roughly 90% of strokes in patients with AF occur in the left atrial appendage (LAA). This understanding has prompted the development and testing of novel percutaneous strategies for LAA closure as an alternative to anticoagulation therapy. The following review examines the relative merits and shortcomings of these strategies and explores future prospects in the prevention of AF-related stroke.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device in Atrial Fibrillation

The relationship of stroke and atrial fibrillation seems to become more complex as we gain more knowledge of the issue. Recent studies have questioned the temporal relationship between the two, which also questions causation. Left atrial appendage closure is an attractive, but unproven technology when compared with the 50-year experience with warfarin. In a patient who is on warfarin and having no issues with bleeding, medication intolerance, or lack of efficacy, it is difficult to justify stopping the drug and placing a closure device as sole therapy to prevent a stroke.

Dealing With the Left Atrial Appendage for Stroke Prevention: Devices and Decision-Making

Left atrial appendage (LAA) device occlusion represents a major evolution in stroke prevention for atrial fibrillation (AF). Left atrial appendage device occlusion is now a proven strategy which provides long-term thromboembolic stroke prevention for patients with non-rheumatic AF. Evidence supports its benefit as an alternative to long-term anticoagulation while mitigating long-term bleeding risks and improving cardiovascular mortality. The therapy offers expanded options to physicians and patients negotiating stroke prevention (both primary and secondary prevention), but a good understanding of the risks and benefits is required for decision-making. This review aims to summarise the evolution of LAA device occlusion therapy, current knowledge in the field and a snapshot of current status of the therapy in clinical practice in Australia and around the world.

ANMCO/AIAC/SICI-GISE/SIC/SICCH Consensus Document: percutaneous occlusion of the left atrial appendage in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients: indications, patient selection, staff skills, organisation, and training

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia and its prevalence is increasing due to the progressive aging of the population. About 20% of strokes are attributable to AF and AF patients are at five-fold increased risk of stroke. The mainstay of treatment of AF is the prevention of thromboembolic complications with oral anticoagulation therapy. Drug treatment for many years has been based on the use of vitamin K antagonists, but recently newer and safer molecules have been introduced (dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban). Despite these advances, many patients still do not receive adequate anticoagulation therapy because of contraindications (relative and absolute) to this treatment. Over the last decade, percutaneous closure of left atrial appendage, main site of thrombus formation during AF, proved effective in reducing thromboembolic complications, thus offering a valid medical treatment especially in patients at increased bleeding risk. The aim of this consensus document is to review the main aspects of left atrial appendage occlusion (selection and multidisciplinary assessment of patients, currently available methods and devices, requirements for centres and operators, associated therapies and follow-up modalities) having as a ground the significant evolution of techniques and the available relevant clinical data.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Stroke Prevention

More than 2.3 million adults in the United States have atrial fibrillation (AF), which exposes them to a 5-fold increased risk of stroke. The left atrial appendage (LAA) appears to be the source of thrombus formation in the vast majority of these patients. Anticoagulation significantly reduces the risk of stroke, but often we encounter patients who have absolute or relative contraindication to anticoagulation. Percutaneous LAA exclusion offers an alternative to anticoagulation to decrease the risk of stroke. Three device systems are currently available in the United States. The WATCHMAN® device is the most studied and approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be used in patients with AF unsuitable for anticoagulation who are at a high risk of stroke. The Amulet® device is currently being used as part of the AMPLATZER® Amulet® LAA Occluder trial, which is a non-inferiority randomized trial comparing the Amulet® to the WATCHMAN® device. The third device in use is the LARIAT®, which is an FDA approved snare and pre-tied stich system. It is used to approximate soft tissue which in this case is the LAA. It is a hybrid system and requires both epicardial and endocardial access. The main obstacle to percutaneous LAA closure is procedural related complications, which can be minimized with optimum operator experience.

Non-Pharmacologic Approach to Prevent Embolization in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in Whom Anticoagulation is Contraindicated

Ischemic stroke is the most common complication of atrial fibrillation (AF). Anticoagulation therapy reduces the risk of systemic embolization in almost all patients with AF irrespective of the type of AF (paroxysmal, persistent or permanent). But, all patients are not suitable candidates for systemic anticoagulation mainly due to the risk of bleeding. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices have been found to be very effective non-pharmacologic alternative therapy for such patients. There are various types of LAAC devices but United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) have approved only Watchman device. Initially, bigger medical centers in the US had started the insertion of Watchman device but with improving procedural techniques and exciting outcomes, even the community-based hospitals have started to embrace this therapy. We have presented the first three cases of Watchman device placement performed in our hospital and discussed about the indications for placement of LAAC devices. We have also reviewed their efficacy individually.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: the Munich consensus document on definitions, endpoints, and data collection requirements for clinical studies

The increasing interest in left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for ischaemic stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) fuels the need for more clinical data on the safety and effectiveness of this therapy. Besides an assessment of the effectiveness of the therapy in specific patients groups, comparisons with pharmacological stroke prophylaxis, surgical approaches, and other device-based therapies are warranted. This paper documents the consensus reached among clinical experts in relevant disciplines from Europe and North America, European cardiology professional societies, and representatives from the medical device industry regarding definitions for parameters and endpoints to be assessed in clinical studies. Adherence to these definitions is proposed in order to achieve a consistent approach across clinical studies on LAAO among the involved stakeholders and various clinical disciplines and thereby facilitate continued evaluation of therapeutic strategies available.

Left atrial appendage closure: outcomes and challenges

Whereas the left atrial appendage plays a rather minor role under physiological circumstances, it gains an importance in patients with atrial fibrillation. Compelling evidence has revealed that the left atrial appendage is implicated as the source of thrombus in the vast majority of strokes in atrial fibrillation. Oral anticoagulation remains the standard of care for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation; nevertheless, this treatment has several limitations and is often contraindicated, particularly in the elderly population in whom the risk of stroke is high. Therefore, occluding the left atrial appendage is a logical approach to prevent thrombus formation and subsequent cardioembolic events in these patients. We present a review of clinical outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing left atrial appendage closure and the challenges faced in this field.

The Cost Effectiveness of LAA Exclusion

Left atrial appendage (LAA) exclusion strategies are increasingly utilized for stroke prevention in lieu of oral anticoagulants. Reductions in bleeding risk and long-term compliance issues bundled with comparable stroke prevention benefits have made these interventions increasingly attractive. Unfortunately, healthcare funding remains limited. Comparative cost economic analyses are therefore critical in optimizing resource allocation. In this review we seek to discourse the cost economics analysis of LAA exclusion over available therapeutic alternatives (warfarin and the new oral anticoagulants (NOACs)). .

The State of the Art: Atrial Fibrillation Epidemiology, Prevention, and Treatment

As the most common sustained arrhythmia in adults, atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established and growing epidemic. To provide optimal patient care, it is important for clinicians to be aware of AF's epidemiological trends, methods of risk reduction, and the various available treatment modalities. Our understanding of AF's pathophysiology has advanced, and with this new understanding has come advancements in prevention strategies as well as pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment options. Following PubMed and MEDLINE searches for AF risk factors, epidemiology, and therapies, we reviewed relevant articles (and bibliographies of those articles) published from 2000 to 2016. This "state-of-the-art" review provides a comprehensive update on the understanding of AF in the world today, contemporary therapeutic options, and directions of ongoing and future study.