Transcatheter cerebral embolic protection during WATCHMAN procedure in two patients with persistent left atrial appendage thrombus: Case report with review of the literature

Overcoming barriers for left atrial appendage thrombus: a systematic review of left atrial appendage closure

BACKGROUND

Approximately 90% of intracardial thrombi originate from the left atrial appendage in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. Even with anticoagulant therapy, left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT) still occurs in 8% of patients. While left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) could be a promising alternative, the current consensus considers LAAT a contraindication to LAAC. However, the feasibility and safety of LAAC in patients with LAAT have yet to be determined.

METHODS

This systematic review synthesizes published data to explore the feasibility and safety of LAAC for patients with LAAT.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 136 patients with LAATs who underwent successful LAAC. The Amulet Amplatzer device was the most frequently utilized device (48.5%). Among these patients, 77 (56.6%) had absolute contraindications to anticoagulation therapy. Cerebral protection devices were utilized by 47 patients (34.6%). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the primary imaging technique used during the procedure. Warfarin and novel oral anticoagulants were the main anticoagulant medications used prior to the procedure, while dual antiplatelet therapy was primarily used post-procedure. During a mean follow-up period of 13.2 ± 11.5 months, there was 1 case of fatality, 1 case of stroke, 3 major bleeding events, 3 instances of device-related thrombus, and 8 cases of peri-device leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the preliminary effectiveness and safety of the LAAC procedure in patients with persistent LAAT. Future large-scale RCTs with varied LAAT characteristics and LAAC device types are essential for evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice.

TriGuard Embolic Protection Device in percutaneous cardiac interventions with intracavitary cardiac thrombosis: A case series

Embolic cerebral protection devices are not routinely used in clinical practice during electrophysiological interventions. We report a case series of patients with intracardiac thrombosis undergoing a percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure and a ventricular tachycardia (VT) catheter ablation supported by TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection Device.

Limitations in Contemporary Pharmacological Stroke Prevention Therapies in Atrial Fibrillation: A Descriptive Literature Review

The most common arrhythmia, atrial fibrillation (AF), increases with age and is associated with a 5-fold increased risk of stroke. Although lifelong oral anticoagulation (OAC) is strongly recommended for stroke prevention in patients with AF and CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 only 50-60% of patients in Western countries belonging to this group are treated with oral anticoagulants, and less than half of these adhere to therapy over time. Before 2010, the numerous limitations associated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were considered to be the reason behind OAC underuse; however, the approval of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) that require once- or twice-daily intake, no regular blood tests and fewer drug-food interactions has resulted in only modest improvements in OAC use and adherence.

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin Following WATCHMAN in High-Risk Patients

Background

In the pivotal WATCHMAN trials, warfarin was used exclusively for postprocedural anticoagulation following left atrial appendage closure. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent left atrial appendage closure with WATCHMAN.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of 318 patients who underwent the WATCHMAN procedure in a tertiary referral center (June 2016-September 2020). We compared the outcomes of patients who were discharged on DOACs versus warfarin after the WATCHMAN procedure. The primary outcome was the composite of any bleeding, thromboembolism, or cardiovascular death through 7 ​days and 45 ​days after the procedure.

Results

The final analysis included 301 patients, of whom 82.4% (248/301) were discharged on DOACs and 17.6% (53/301) were discharged on warfarin. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.9 ​± ​1.6 and 2.9 ​± ​0.9, respectively. The primary composite outcome was similar between the DOAC and warfarin groups through 7 ​days (3.2% vs 5.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-3.17; P ​= ​.59) and 45 days after procedure (10.1% vs 11.3%; adjusted OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.41-3.45; P ​= ​.76). Major bleeding (5.2% vs 9.5%; P ​= ​.34) and all-cause readmission (12.5% vs 16.9%; P ​= ​.85) at 45 ​days were comparable between the DOAC and warfarin groups. The overall incidence of device-related thrombus and significant peri-device flow at 45 ​days were low (<0.5%).

Conclusions

In high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation, the primary composite outcome of any bleeding, thromboembolism, or cardiovascular death through 7 ​days and 45 ​days following WATCHMAN implantation was similar in patients receiving DOACs versus warfarin.

Use of a cerebral protection device to facilitate pulmonary vein isolation in a patient with left atrial mass arising from the interatrial septum

Sentinel cerebral embolic protection devices (CPDs) may limit periprocedural cerebrovascular events by preventing micro and macro-embolization to the brain, and has been used in many cardiology and radiology procedures. We hereby report the use of a Sentinel CPD to facilitate safe and effective atrial fibrillation ablation in a patient with a left atrial mass arising from the interatrial septum.

Safety and Feasibility of Same-Day Discharge After Left Atrial Appendage Closure With the WATCHMAN Device

Background:

As the use of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) becomes more widespread, improvements in resource utilization and cost-effectiveness are necessary. Currently, there are limited data on same-day discharge (SDD) after LAAC. We aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of SDD versus non-SDD in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAC.

Methods:

We retrospectively studied 211 patients who underwent the WATCHMAN procedure in a tertiary hospital (June 2016 to June 2019). The primary safety outcome was the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding requiring transfusion, vascular complications requiring endovascular intervention, or death through 7 days (periprocedural) and 45 days post-procedure. The secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome and all-cause readmission. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients who had SDD and non-SDD post-procedure.

Results:

Patients with procedure-related complications on the day of LAAC and patients who were admitted for acute clinical events before LAAC were excluded. One hundred ninety patients were included in the final analysis. Seventy-two of 190 (38%) patients had SDD, and 118 of 190 (62%) had non-SDD. There were no statistically significant differences in the primary safety outcome through 7 days (1.4% versus 5.9%; P=0.26) and 45 days post-procedure (2.8% versus 9.3%; P=0.14) between the two groups. The secondary outcomes were similar in both groups. No patients had device-related thrombus on transesophageal echocardiography at 45 days. Only 1 patient from the non-SDD group had clinically significant peri-device flow (>5 mm) at 45 days.

Conclusions:

In a selected cohort of patients who underwent successful elective LAAC with WATCHMAN without same-day procedure-related complications, the primary safety outcome and secondary outcomes through 7 and 45 days post-procedure were similar in the SDD and non-SDD groups. Our findings are hypothesis generating and warrant further investigation in prospective trials.