Impact of Peridevice Leak on 5-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure

WATCHMAN versus LACbes® device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: a single-center, propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

Different left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices have been introduced into the clinical setting. A new dual-seal mechanism LACbes® occluder with isogenous barbs for LAAC has been designed to facilitate easier delivery and improve safety. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the WATCHMAN with those of the LACbes® device for LAAC.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who had undergone LAAC performed using a WATCHMAN or LACbes® device from June 2016 to February 2022 were included. The primary efficacy endpoint included ischemic stroke, cardiovascular/unexplained death and device-related thrombus, while the primary safety endpoint included major peri-procedural complications and major bleeding events during clinical follow-ups. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed.

RESULTS

After PSM, 184 patients were included in each group. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.1 ± 1.5 (LACbes®) vs. 3.1 ± 1.4 (WATCHMAN), and the HAS-BLED score was 2.7 ± 1.1 vs. 2.7 ± 1.0. At a mean follow-up of 2.5 ± 1.5 vs. 2.4 ± 0.9 years, the defined three endpoints were comparable between the two groups. The occurrence of all-cause stroke was lower in 5/452 (1.8%) with LACbes® vs. 16/433 (3.7%) with WATCHMAN occluders (HR, 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18-0.89, P = 0.023), and the incidence of any bleeding was higher in the WATCHMAN group (41/433, 9.5% vs. 8/452, 1.8%; HR, 0.19, 95% CI, 0.11-0.33).

CONCLUSION

The LACbes® occluder exhibited comparable safety and efficacy of stroke prevention for AF when compared with the WATCHMAN device.

State of the Art in Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has become an important therapeutic target for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Over the past 2 decades, several advancements in LAAO devices (percutaneous and surgical) have been made for stroke prevention and arrhythmia therapy. However, there are several unanswered questions regarding optimal patient selection, the preferred LAAO approach and device, the management of periprocedural and postprocedural complications, including pericardial effusion, device-related thrombus, and device leaks. This review focuses on fundamental foundational concepts in various aspects of the left atrial appendage and management strategies as they relate to current clinical needs.

An International Consensus Practical Guide on Left Atrial Appendage Closure for the Non-implanting Physician: Executive Summary

Many patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are in need of stroke prevention are not treated with oral anticoagulation or discontinue treatment shortly after its initiation. Despite the availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such undertreatment has improved somewhat but is still evident. This is due to continued risks of bleeding events or ischemic strokes while on DOAC, poor treatment compliance, or aversion to anticoagulant therapy. Because of significant improvements in procedural safety over the years left atrial appendage closure (LAAC), using a catheter-based, device implantation approach, is increasingly favored for the prevention of thromboembolic events in AF patients who cannot have long-term oral anticoagulation. This article is an executive summary of a practical guide recently published by an international expert consensus group, which introduces the LAAC devices and briefly explains the implantation technique. The indications and device follow-up are more comprehensively described. This practical guide, aligned with published guideline/guidance, is aimed at those non-implanting physicians who may need to refer patients for consideration of LAAC.

Impact of Angiographically Detected Residual Trabeculation After Left Atrial Appendage Closure Using the WATCHMAN Device: Insight From the OCEAN-LAAC Registry

BACKGROUND

Research on the impact of angiographically detected residual trabeculation after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the incidence, characteristics, and clinical implications of angiographically detected residual trabeculation after LAAC using the WATCHMAN device.

METHODS

We analyzed 1350 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing LAAC using the WATCHMAN device from the OCEAN-LAAC registry, which is a prospective ongoing, multicenter Japanese registry. The inclusion criteria comprised patients who successfully underwent LAAC and whose presence or absence of residual trabeculation can be confirmed using a contrast medium. The clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without angiographically detected residual trabeculation.

RESULTS

Residual trabeculation was angiographically detected in 5.6% (75/1350 patients). At the procedure, the proportion of peri-device leak (PDL) was significantly higher in the residual trabeculation group than in the non-residual trabeculation group (20% vs. 5.1%, p < 0.001). However, the PDL and device-related thrombosis at 45 days and 1 year were comparable between the two groups (37% vs. 23%, p = 0.24; 28% vs. 31%, p = 0.84; 2.1% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.50; 6.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.69, respectively). The 3-year cumulative incidence of ischemic stroke, all cardiovascular death, and all-cause death were comparable between the two groups (5.7% vs. 5.5%, log-rank p = 0.96; 7.7% vs. 8.9%, log-rank p = 0.34, 31.4% vs. 22.3%, log-rank p = 0.71, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The angiographically detected residual trabeculation rate was 5.6%, and this population had a significantly higher prevalence of PDL at the procedure. However, the presence of residual trabeculation did not contribute to PDL or device-related thrombosis at follow-up or affect the clinical outcomes.

5-Year Results From the AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The Amulet IDE trial (AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder [LAAO] Investigational Device Exemption [IDE] Trial) evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the Amulet occluder (Abbott) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The Amulet IDE trial is the largest randomized LAAO trial, comparing the Amulet occluder with the Watchman 2.5 device (Boston Scientific).

OBJECTIVES

This analysis presents the 5-year results from the trial comparing the 2 devices head to head.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Amulet IDE trial were at a high risk of stroke or systemic embolism defined as a CHADS2 score ≥2 or CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥3. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) use and key clinical outcomes are presented through 5 years.

RESULTS

A total of 1,878 patients were randomized, with 1,833 undergoing a device implantation attempt (n = 917, Amulet occluder; and n = 916, Watchman device). A significantly higher percentage of patients were free of OAC in the Amulet occluder group at each follow-up visit, with 94.0% and 90.9% free of OAC at the last 5-year follow-up visit in the Amulet and Watchman device groups, respectively (P = 0.009). The 5-year clinical outcomes were similar between the Amulet and Watchman devices, including the composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (7.4% vs 7.1%; P = 0.851), the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death (20.3% vs 20.7%; P = 0.666), major bleeding (20.1% vs 20.0%; P = 0.882), cardiovascular (CV) death (14.3% vs 15.4%; P = 0.429), and all-cause death (28.7% vs 31.1%; P = 0.217). Annualized ischemic stroke rates at 5 years were low and the same for Amulet (1.6%/y) and Watchman (1.6%/y) devices. Strokes in patients with the Amulet occluder were less severe (n = 38, nondisabling; n = 11, disabling; n = 11, fatal; n = 12, unknown) than strokes in patients with the Watchman device (n = 19, nondisabling; n = 22, disabling; n = 17, fatal; n = 10, unknown). Moreover, device factors (device-related thrombus or peridevice leak ≥3 mm) preceded stroke events and CV deaths more frequently in patients with the Watchman device (n = 63) compared with patients with the Amulet occluder (n = 31).

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-year outcomes from the largest randomized LAAO clinical trial demonstrated the long-term safety and effectiveness of the Amulet occluder and Watchman 2.5 devices. The dual-seal Amulet occluder reduces atrial fibrillation-related thromboembolic events while eliminating the need for long-term OAC. (AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder [LAAO] Investigational Device Exemption [IDE] Trial [Amulet IDE trial]; NCT02879448).

Management strategies to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and malignant left atrial appendage

BACKGROUND

Patients with atrial fibrillation and malignant left atrial appendage (LAA) may benefit from LAA closure (LAAC); however, evidence is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine management strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and malignant LAA.

METHODS

Malignant LAA was defined as a history of ischemic stroke and/or evidence of LAA thrombus despite continuous oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy (continuous for ≥3 weeks). We studied 80 patients with malignant LAA treated with LAAC. We compared these patients first against 44 patients with malignant LAA treated with OAC alone and second against 114 patients without malignant LAA who were treated with LAAC for conventional indications.

RESULTS

Among patients with malignant LAA (first comparison), those treated with LAAC had a higher 1-year cumulative incidence rate of ischemic stroke than did patients treated with OAC alone (6.3% vs 5.3%; log-rank, P = .09) whereas the difference in stroke risk while receiving OAC was comparable (2.7% vs 5.3%; log-rank, P = .84). Furthermore, all disabling stroke events in patients with malignant LAA treated with LAAC occurred only while not receiving OAC. Among patients treated with LAAC (second comparison), those with malignant LAA had a higher 1-year cumulative incidence rate of ischemic stroke (and ischemic stroke due to device-related thrombosis) than did those without malignant LAA (6.3% vs 2.2%; log-rank, P = .009 and 2.2% vs 0%; log-rank, P = .04, respectively). However, these differences in stroke risk were no longer significant while receiving OAC (2.7% vs 1.0%; log-rank, P = .11).

CONCLUSION

Combination performing LAAC and continuation of OAC may be options to prevent ischemic stroke in patients with high thromboembolic risk and malignant LAA.

Incidence and temporal evolution of delayed peridevice leak after left atrial appendage closure

BACKGROUND

Peridevice leak (PDL) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) portends adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence, predictors, clinical implications, and temporal evolution of PDL after LAAC.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included all patients who underwent LAAC with Watchman FLX and had no PDL detected at the time of implantation. The primary end point was the incidence of new PDL at initial imaging. The composite secondary end point included continued oral anticoagulation after initial imaging, device-related thrombus, stroke or transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, and need for PDL closure at longest follow-up. Temporal evolution of PDL was assessed in patients with available surveillance imaging.

RESULTS

Of the 355 patients who completed imaging at 47 days (interquartile range [IQR] 44-50 days), 139 (39%) had new PDL with a mean leak size of 3.2 ± 1.4 mm (median 3.0 mm; IQR 2.0-4.0 mm; range 1.0-9.0 mm). Multiple deployment attempts and larger device size were positive predictors of PDL, while increased contrast volume administration was a negative predictor of PDL. The composite secondary end point occurred in 42 (30%) patients with PDL and 33 (15%) patients without PDL (P < .001). Of the 139 patients with PDL, 43 (31%) had surveillance imaging where the leak size regressed from 3.7 ± 1.8 mm at 46 days (IQR 44-51 days) to 1.7 ± 2.0 mm at 189 days (IQR 158-285 days) (P < .001). The leak size regressed in 33 (77%), remained stable in 4 (9%), and progressed in 6 (14%) cases.

CONCLUSION

Despite design improvements, LAAC with Watchman FLX demonstrates a significant incidence of PDL with meaningful clinical implications. Regardless of initial size, most leaks regressed over time.

Left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: current status and perspectives

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of stroke and systemic embolism, and the left atrial appendage (LAA) has been identified as a principal source of thromboembolism in these patients. While oral anticoagulation is the current standard of care, LAA closure (LAAC) emerges as an alternative or complementary treatment approach to reduce the risk of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF. Moderate-sized randomized clinical studies have provided data for the efficacy and safety of catheter-based LAAC, largely compared with vitamin K antagonists. LAA device iterations, advances in pre- and peri-procedural imaging, and implantation techniques continue to increase the efficacy and safety of LAAC. More data about efficacy and safety of LAAC have been collected, and several randomized clinical trials are currently underway to compare LAAC with best medical care (including non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants) in different clinical settings. Surgical LAAC in patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery reduced the risk of stroke on background of anticoagulation therapy in the LAAOS III study. In this review, we describe the rapidly evolving field of LAAC and discuss recent clinical data, ongoing studies, open questions, and current limitations of LAAC.

Position Statement on Cardiac Computed Tomography Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is rapidly growing as valid stroke prevention therapy in atrial fibrillation. Cardiac imaging plays an instrumental role in preprocedural planning, procedural execution, and postprocedural follow-up. Recently, cardiac computed tomography (CCT) has made significant advancements, resulting in increasing use both preprocedurally and in outpatient follow-up. It provides a noninvasive, high-resolution alternative to the current standard, transesophageal echocardiography, and may display advantages in both the detection and characterization of device-specific complications, such as peridevice leak and device-related thrombosis. The implementation of CCT in the follow-up after LAAO has identified new findings such as hypoattenuated thickening on the atrial device surface and left atrial appendage contrast patency, which are not readily assessable on transesophageal echocardiography. Currently, there is a lack of standardization for acquisition and interpretation of images and consensus on definitions of essential findings on CCT in the postprocedural phase. This paper intends to provide a practical and standardized approach to both acquisition and interpretation of CCT after LAAO based on a comprehensive review of the literature and expert consensus among European and North American interventional and imaging specialists.

Watchman vs. Amulet for Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a crucial intervention for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who are unsuitable for long-term anticoagulation. Amulet and Watchman are the most implanted devices worldwide for performing LAAC, and the aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive comparison focusing on their efficacy, safety, and short- and long-term outcomes. The Watchman device, the first to gain FDA approval, has been extensively studied and demonstrates significant reductions in stroke and systemic embolism rates. The Amulet device, a newer alternative, promises enhanced design features for more efficient appendage sealing. Current data highlight that both devices offer similar efficacy and safety for LAAC. While the two devices differ in terms of intraprocedural complication rates, they offer similar short- to long-term outcomes in terms of peri-device leaks, device-related thrombosis, and mortality. Both devices are indicated for patients who are unable to tolerate OAC, given their similar risk and safety profiles. Newer clinical studies are directed at establishing the efficacy of both devices as the primary method for stroke prevention in AF as an alternative to OAC.

Thoracoscopic Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion with the AtriClip PRO2: An Experience of 144 Patients

AIM

To report the clinical outcomes of thoracoscopic left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with the AtriClip PRO2 device (Atricure Inc, Mason, OH, USA). Stroke risk reduction with LAAO in patients with atrial fibrillation is now well-established. Many surgical and percutaneous techniques have been used, with varying rates of success. The percutaneous devices have had issues with procedural complications and peridevice flow. Thoracoscopic AtriClip offers an epicardial linear closure of the appendage at its ostium. This study sought to evaluate its safety and efficacy in achieving complete LAA closure.

METHOD

This is a prospective series of thoracoscopic AtriClip PRO2 as a standalone procedure or a thoracoscopic AtriClip deployed as an adjunct to minimal access cardiac and thoracic surgery. Study ethical approval was granted by the hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.

RESULTS

In total, 144 thoracoscopic AtriClip procedures were conducted by a single surgeon from 2017 to 2022, 56 standalone and 88 concomitant. There was no mortality or major morbidities. A 100% success in complete LAA closure was observed, with 87% complete follow-up imaging. For patients that underwent standalone AtriClip after cessation of anticoagulation, no thromboembolic phenomena were seen in the 180 patient-years of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that thoracoscopic placement of AtriClip is safe and effective in achieving consistent and complete LAAO. Future randomised trials will be useful to compare outcomes with percutaneous devices.

Transition from WATCHMAN generation-2.5 device to WATCHMAN FLX device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: Incidence and predictors of device-related thrombosis and short- to mid-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) not suitable for long-term anticoagulant therapy undergo percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) using the WATCHMAN device. The safety and efficacy of WATCHMAN-FLX (WM-FLX) compared with WATCHMAN-2.5 (WM-2.5), particularly in Asian populations, is unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated the background, procedure, and clinical outcomes of 199 patients who underwent LAAC between September 2019 and December 2022 and compared WM-2.5 (72 patients) with WM-FLX (127 patients).

RESULTS

The mean age was 76 years, with 128 men, and 100 had nonparoxysmal AF (non-PAF). The mean CHA2DS2-VASc, and HAS-BLED were 5.1, and 3.2 points, respectively. WM-FLX group demonstrated a shorter procedure time than WM-2.5 group (50 vs. 42 min, p = 0.001). The WM-FLX group demonstrated no procedural-related acute cardiac tamponade, which was significantly low (5.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.02), and a significantly higher rate of complete seal at 45-day (63% vs. 80%, p = 0.04). WM-FLX group had a significantly higher cumulative 1-year incidence of device-related thrombosis (DRT) than WM-2.5 group (3.4% vs. 7.0%, Log-rank p = 0.01). Univariate analysis identified two DRT risk factors in the WM-FLX group: non-PAF (odds ratio [OR] 7.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-48.7; p = 0.04), and 35-mm device (OR 5.13; 95% CI 1.31-19.8; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

WM-FLX significantly improved the procedural quality and safety of LAAC. However, DRT remains an important issue even in the novel LAAC device, being a hazard for patients with high DRT risk, such as having non-PAF and using 35-mm devices.

A Comprehensive Review of Percutaneous and Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, and is associated with a significant risk of thromboembolic events. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as a promising alternative for patients with contraindications or intolerance to anticoagulant therapy. This review summarises the current evidence, indications, and technical advancements in surgical and percutaneous LAAO. Preprocedural planning relies on various imaging techniques, each with unique advantages and limitations. The existing randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses demonstrate favourable results for both percutaneous and surgical LAAO. Postprocedural management emphasises personalised anticoagulation strategies and comprehensive imaging surveillance to ensure device stability and detect complications. Future focus should be put on antithrombotic regimens, investigating predictors of device-related complications, and simplifying procedural aspects to enhance patient outcomes. In summary, LAAO is presented as a valuable therapeutic option for preventing AF-related thromboembolic events, with ongoing research aimed at refining techniques and improving patient care.

Clinical outcome and intraprocedural characteristics of left atrial appendage occlusion: a comparison between single-occlusive plug-type and dual-occlusive disc-type devices

Background

Percutaneous interventional left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a reliable, safe, and effective alternative for stroke prevention in selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

In a retrospective observational study, 149 patients underwent LAAO between 2016 and 2022 at the Department of Cardiology of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow, with AF for prevention of thromboembolic complications. We compared patient characteristics, intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes between single-occlusive plug-type (SOPT) and dual-occlusive disc-type (DODT) devices.

Results

In all patients, the device implantation was successful. 60 patients received a SOPT occluder, including Watchman (35%) and Watchman FLX Occluders (65%), while 89 patients received a DODT occluder, including Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (37.1%), the Amplatzer Amulet (25.8%), and the LAmbre occluder (37.1%) systems. Procedure duration was significantly longer for DODT occluder implantation (49 ± 33 vs. 41 ± 25 min, p = 0.018). There were no in-hospital deaths or thromboembolic events reported after LAAO in both groups. Beyond that, a low rate of bleeding or access-side-related complications and pericardial tamponades were observed. Anticoagulation at discharge varied. About 60.8% of patients received dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge, and 33.1% received direct oral anticoagulants. A 6-month follow-up was obtained in 85% of the patients. All implanted devices were in the desired position. However, in 5.7% of the patients, a device-related thrombus formation was detected in the SOPT group, while no thrombus was seen in the DODT group (p = 0.11). Thromboembolic events were noticed in 3.1%, without any difference between the device types. There was a statistically non-significant trend for less residual device leaks after SOPT vs. DODT implantation (no leak in 71.7% vs. 62.2%, p = 0.07; minor leaks <5 mm, 9.4% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.1). In the SOPT group, less bleeding complications were reported after LAAO (11.3% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.1).

Conclusion

Our data suggest the safety and efficiency of LAAO with a very high procedural implantation success rate irrespective of the used LAA device. Furthermore, no relevant procedural or device-related complication occurred during the 6-month follow-up in all patients.

Association of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion with acute changes in left atrial pressure: An invasive hemodynamic study

BACKGROUND

The hemodynamic effects of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the effect of LAAO on invasive hemodynamics and their correlation with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We recorded mean left atrial pressure (mLAP) before and after device deployment. We assessed the prevalence and predictors of mLAP increase after deployment, the association between significant mLAP increase after deployment and 45-day peridevice leak (PDL), and the association between mLAP increase and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. A significant mLAP increase was defined as one equal to or greater than the mean percentage increase in mLAP after deployment (≥28%).

RESULTS

We included 302 patients (36.4% female; mean age, 75.8 ± 9.5 years). After deployment, mLAP increased in 48% of patients, 38% of whom experienced significant mLAP increase. Independent predictors of mLAP increase were baseline mLAP ≤14 mm Hg, nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation, and age per 5 years (odds ratios: 3.66 [95% CI, 2.21-6.05], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.08-3.02], and 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73-0.99], respectively). Significant mLAP increase was an independent predictor of 45-day PDL (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.04-6.26). There was no association between mLAP increase and HF hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

After deployment, mLAP acutely rises in 48% of patients, although this is not associated with increased HF hospitalizations. PDL is more likely to develop at 45 days in patients with significant increase in mLAP after deployment, although most leaks were small (<5 mm). These findings suggest that mLAP increase after deployment is not associated with major safety concerns. Additional studies are warranted to explore the long-term hemodynamic effects of LAAO.

Risk factors, clinical implications, and management of peridevice leak following left atrial appendage closure: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a treatment modality for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). One of the potential complications of LAAC is a peri-device leak (PDL), which could potentially increase the risk of thromboembolism formation.

METHODS

This systematic review was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Using four databases, all primary studies through April 2022 that met selection criteria were included. Outcomes of interest were studies reporting on PDL characteristics, risk factors and management.

RESULTS

A total of 116 studies met selection criteria (97 original studies and 19 case reports/series). In the original studies (n = 30,133 patients), the weighted mean age was 72.0 ± 7.4 years (57% females) with a HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc weighted means of 2.8 ± 1.1 and 3.8 ± 1.3, respectively. The most common definition of PDL was based on size; 5 mm: major, 3-5 mm: moderate, < 1 mm minor, or trivial. Follow up time for PDL detection was 7.15 ± 9.0 months. 33% had PDL, irrespective of PDL severity/size, and only 0.9% had PDL of greater than 5 mm. The main risk factors for PDL development included lower degree of over-sizing, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, device/LAA shape mismatch, previous radiofrequency ablation, and male sex. The most common methods to screen for PDL included transesophageal echocardiogram and cardiac CT. PDL Management approaches include Amplatzer Patent Foramen Ovale occluder, Hookless ACP, Amplatzer vascular plug II, embolic coils, and detachable vascular coils; removal or replacement of the device; and left atriotomy.

CONCLUSION

Following LAAC, the emergence of a PDL is a significant complication to be aware of. Current evidence suggests possible risk factors that are worth assessing in-depth. Additional research is required to assess suitable candidates, timing, and strategies to managing patients with PDL.

Comparative Assessment of Percutaneous Left-Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Devices-A Single Center Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left-atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established method for preventing strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation, offering an alternative to oral anticoagulation. Various occluder devices have been developed to cater to individual anatomical needs and ensure a safe and effective procedure. In this retrospective, monocentric cohort study, we compare different LAAO devices with respect to clinical outcomes, LAA sealing properties, and device-related complications.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 270 patients who underwent percutaneous LAA closure in our center between 2009 and 2023. Patient data were extracted from medical records, including gender, age at implantation, indication, device type and size, laboratory values, LAA anatomy, periprocedural complications, ECG parameters, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography parameters (TTE and TEE), as well as medication at discharge. Moreover, fluoroscopy time and implantation duration, as well as post-implantation clinical events up to 1 year, were collected. Endpoints were bleeding events, recurrent stroke, thrombi on devices, and death.

RESULTS

The implanted devices were the Watchman 2.5, Watchman FLX, Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP), and Amulet. The procedural success rate was 95.7% (n = 265), with cactus anatomy posing the most challenges across all devices. The mean patient age was 75.5 ± 7.7 years, with 64.5% being male. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.8 ± 1.5 and the median HAS-BLED score was 3.8 ± 1.0. Indications for LAA closure included past bleeding events and elevated bleeding risk. Periprocedural complications were most commonly bleeding at the puncture site, particularly after ACP implantation (p = 0.014). Significant peridevice leaks (PDL) were observed in 21.4% of simple sealing mechanism devices versus 0% in double sealing mechanism devices (p = 0.004). Thrombi were detected on devices in six patients, with no subsequent ischemic stroke or thromboembolic event. Comparative analysis revealed no significant differences in the occurrence of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), thromboembolic events, device-related thrombi, or mortality among different device types. A 62.3% relative risk reduction in thromboembolic events and 38.6% in major bleedings could be observed over 568.2 patient years.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, our study highlights the efficacy and safety of LAA closure using various occluder devices despite anatomical challenges. Our long-term follow-up findings support LAA closure as a promising option for stroke prevention in selected patient cohorts. Further research is needed to refine patient selection criteria and optimize outcomes in LAA closure procedures.

Incidence, progression, and predictors of left atrial appendage sealing after Watchman FLX device implantation with computed tomographic assessment

BACKGROUND

Limited data exists regarding incidence, progression, and predictors of left atrial appendage (LAA) sealing after transcatheter LAA closure. We aimed to evaluate the incidence, progression, and predictive factors associated with LAA sealing after LAA closure.

METHODS

This study includes patients who underwent successful LAA closure with Watchman FLX device and had both pre- and postprocedural computed tomography (CT). Postprocedural CT was performed 45 days after LAA closure and used to evaluate residual LAA patency. Patient who had residual LAA patency at 45 days underwent 1-year follow-up CT.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients (mean age: 75.2 ± 9.6 years; 53.3% female) who underwent successful LAA closure with Watchman FLX device and had pre- and postprocedural CT at 45 days were included. Residual patency was observed in 35 (33.3%) patients: 21 (20.0%) patients showed complete contrast opacification in LAA (complete LAA patency) while 14 (13.3%) patients showed contrast opacification only in the distal LAA (distal LAA patency). Among patients with residual LAA patency at 45 days, the rate of LAA sealing at 1 year was significantly higher in the distal LAA patency group than in the complete LAA patency group (75.0% vs. 16.7%; p = 0.019). Increased depth oversizing was associated with both distal LAA patency and complete LAA patency.

CONCLUSION

Postprocedural CT at 45 days detected patent LAA in one-third of patients after LAA closure. LAA sealing was more frequently observed at 1 year among the distal LAA patency group than the complete LAA patency group.

Steerable Delivery Sheath for Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Patients With Severely Enlarged Left Atria

Background

Enlarged left atrium (LA) is frequently identified in patients who undergo left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and negatively affects the device's final position and intervention results. Steerable delivery sheath (SDS) could represent an option to overcome these difficulties. We aimed to assess the feasibility of SDS-assisted procedures and compare their efficacy to the standard sheath strategy.

Methods

This study analyzed patients from our institution's LAAC registry who had severe LA enlargement on CT scan (index LA volume >90 mL/m2) and underwent AMULET device implantation between January 2019 and March 2023. The patients underwent postprocedural CT scan to assess the device's position, residual LAA filling, and peridevice leaks.

Results

A total of 195 consecutive patients were screened and 47 (24%) met the inclusion criteria (n = 22 SDS group; n = 25 standard group). There was no difference in baseline clinical, anatomical, or procedural characteristics. The procedural technical success (96%) and complication rates (9% vs 4%; P = .59) were comparable in both groups. Post-LAAC CT scans were obtained in 19 SDS group and 22 standard group patients. We observed significantly lower incidences of residual patent LAA (26% vs 72%; P = .005), peridevice leaks (16% vs 64%; P = .004), and off-axis device position (0% vs 27%; P = .02) in SDS compared to the standard group, suggesting a better LAA sealing.

Conclusions

Severe LA enlargement was frequent among LAAC candidates. In this situation, the use of SDS appears feasible and safe, leading to more efficient closures on follow-up imaging without a higher risk of periprocedural complications.

Residual leaks following percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and outcomes: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Residual leaks are not infrequent after left atrial appendage occlusion. However, there is still uncertainty regarding their prognostic implications. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of residual leaks after left atrial appendage occlusion.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted until 19 February 2023. Residual leaks comprised peri-device leaks (PDLs) on transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or computed tomography (CT), as well as left atrial appendage patency on CT. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to assess the clinical impact of residual leaks.

RESULTS

Overall 48 eligible studies (44 non-randomized/observational and 4 randomized studies) including 61 666 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent left atrial appendage occlusion were analysed. Peri-device leak by TEE was present in 26.1% of patients. Computed tomography-based left atrial appendage patency and PDL were present in 54.9% and 57.3% of patients, respectively. Transoesophageal echocardiography-based PDL (i.e. any reported PDL regardless of its size) was significantly associated with a higher risk of thromboembolism [pooled odds ratio (pOR) 2.04, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52-2.74], all-cause mortality (pOR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.08-1.24), and major bleeding (pOR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03-1.22), compared with no reported PDL. A positive graded association between PDL size and risk of thromboembolism was noted across TEE cut-offs. For any PDL of >0, >1, >3, and >5 mm, the pORs for thromboembolism were 1.82 (95% CI: 1.35-2.47), 2.13 (95% CI: 1.04-4.35), 4.14 (95% CI: 2.07-8.27), and 4.44 (95% CI: 2.09-9.43), respectively, compared with either no PDL or PDL smaller than each cut-off. Neither left atrial appendage patency, nor PDL by CT was associated with thromboembolism (pOR 1.45 and 1.04, 95% CI: 0.84-2.50 and 0.52-2.07, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Peri-device leak detected by TEE was associated with adverse events, primarily thromboembolism. Residual leaks detected by CT were more frequent but lacked prognostic significance.

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: Our Current Failures and Required Research

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is a common rhythm disorder of middle-aged to older adults that can cause ischemic strokes and systemic embolism. Lifelong use of oral anticoagulants reduces the risk of these ischemic events but increases the risk of major and clinically relevant hemorrhages. These medications also require strict compliance for efficacy, and they have nontrivial failure rates in higher-risk patients. Left atrial appendage closure is a nonpharmacological method to prevent ischemic strokes in atrial fibrillation without the need for lifelong anticoagulant use, but this procedure has the potential for complications and residual embolic events. This workshop of the Roundtable of Academia and Industry for Stroke Prevention discussed future research needed to further decrease the ischemic and hemorrhagic risks among patients with atrial fibrillation. A direct thrombin inhibitor, factor Xa inhibitors, and left atrial appendage closure are FDA-approved approaches whereas factor XIa inhibitors are currently being studied in phase 3 randomized controlled trials for stroke prevention. The benefits, risks, and shortcomings of these treatments and future research required in different high-risk patient populations are reviewed in this consensus statement.

Use of Computed Tomography for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Procedure Planning and Post-Procedure Assessment

Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative to systemic anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with increased risk for thromboembolic events. Pre- and post-procedural imaging is essential for technical success, allowing practitioners to identify contraindications, select appropriate devices, and recognize procedural complications. Although transesophageal echocardiography has traditionally served as the preeminent imaging modality in LAAO, cardiac computed tomography imaging has emerged as a noninvasive surrogate given its excellent isotropic spatial resolution, multiplanar reconstruction capability, rapid temporal resolution, and large field of view.

Impact of intracardiac echocardiography versus transesophageal echocardiography guidance on left atrial appendage occlusion procedures: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is increasingly used during left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as an alternative to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of ICE versus TEE guidance during LAAO on procedural characteristics and acute outcomes, as well the presence of peri-device leaks and residual septal defects during follow-up.

METHODS

All studies comparing ICE-guided versus TEE-guided LAAO were identified. The primary outcomes were procedural efficacy and occurrence of procedure-related complications. Secondary outcomes included lab efficiency (defined as a reduction in in-room time), procedural time, fluoroscopy time, and presence of peri-device leaks and residual interatrial septal defects (IASD) during follow-up.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (n = 5637) were included. There were no differences in procedural success (98.3% vs. 97.8%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.42-1.27, p = .27; I2  = 0%) or adverse events (4.5% vs. 4.4%; OR 0.81 95% CI 0.56-1.16, p = .25; I2  = 0%) between the ICE-guided and TEE-guided groups. ICE guidance reduced in in-room time (mean-weighted 28.6-min reduction in in-room time) without differences in procedural time or fluoroscopy time. There were no differences in peri-device leak (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68-1.27, p = 0.64); however, an increased prevalence of residual IASD was observed with ICE-guided versus TEE-guided LAAO (46.3% vs. 34.2%; OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.05-4.75, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

ICE guidance is associated with similar procedural efficacy and safety, but could result in improved lab efficiency (as established by a significant reduction in in-room time). No differences in the rate of periprocedural leaks were found. A higher prevalence of residual interatrial septal defects was observed with ICE guidance.

Anticoagulants versus Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Co-Morbid Thrombocytopenia

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative approach to anticoagulants. Nonetheless, data regarding the outcomes of LAAC procedures in patients with thrombocytopenia remain lacking. The primary objective was to determine the incidence of the composite endpoint comprising ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, major bleeding, and cardiac cause of death among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and thrombocytopenia who were either undergoing LAAC or receiving oral anticoagulants. The secondary endpoint was the determination of total mortality. Data from a prospective, single-center registry of patients undergoing LAAC procedures were analyzed. A subset of 50 consecutive patients with thrombocytopenia were selected. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a thrombocyte count below 150,000. Subsequently, from patients hospitalized with AF receiving oral anticoagulants, 50 patients were further chosen based on propensity score matching, ensuring comparability with the study group. The primary endpoint occurred in 2% of patients in the LAAC group and 10% of patients in the non-LAAC group (p = 0.097). Additionally, a significant difference was noted in the occurrence of the secondary endpoint, which was observed in 0% of patients in the LAAC group and 10% of patients in the non-LAAC group (p = 0.025). In patients with thrombocytopenia the LAAC procedure improves prognosis compared with continued anticoagulant treatment.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure: A Narrative Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and the cause of thromboembolic events in elderly patients worldwide. AF is associated with a significantly increased risk of morbidity and mortality due to cardiac emboli, primarily from left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus. Oral anticoagulation therapy is the standard treatment to effectively reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with AF. However, anticoagulation treatment increases bleeding risk. LAA closure (LAAC) has recently been introduced as a feasible mechanical preventive intervention for thromboembolic events while minimizing the risk of bleeding. Transcatheter LAAC devices have evolved in the past decade, and several ongoing trials have demonstrated the improvements of safety and outcomes in newer generation devices. This review summarizes the current perspectives and outcomes regarding LAAC as an alternative to pharmacologic therapy.

Meta-Analysis of the Outcomes of Peri-Device Leak After Left Atrial Appendage Closure

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) reduces the risk of thromboembolic stroke in atrial fibrillation. Peri-device leak (PDL) after LAAC may affect the subsequent risk of thromboembolism. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PDL after LAAC. We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar for studies reporting outcomes of PDL after LAAC from inception through October 2022. The primary outcome was the composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or systemic embolism (SE). Secondary outcomes included all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke, TIA, and device-related thrombus. Outcomes were pooled using random-effects models. We used I2 statistics to assess statistical heterogeneity; I2 >50% considered significant heterogeneity. This study included 54,279 patients from 11 studies (6 observational, 2 nonrandomized controlled trials [non-RCTs] primary results, 2 RCT post hoc analyses, and 1 analysis combining 2 RCTs data). PDL was associated with a significant increase in the composite outcome of stroke, TIA, or SE (odds ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.52, p = 0.03, I2 = 43%) as compared with cases with no PDL. There were no significant differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, ischemic stroke, TIA, or device-related thrombus. In conclusion, PDL after LAAC is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism (composite stroke, TIA, or SE) without impacting mortality.

Safety and efficacy of ablation for atrial fibrillation in combination with left atrial appendage occlusion in octogenarians

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) combined with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a feasible approach for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Its role in octogenarians with AF is unclear.

HYPOTHESIS

In AF patients over 80 years, CA combined with LAAO is a feasible way in restoring sinus rhythm and preventing stroke.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study. Patients who underwent CA and LAAO in a single procedure between March 2018 and December 2020 were included. Efficacy endpoints included procedural success rate, AF recurrence rate, and thromboembolic events. Safety endpoints included pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade, device-related thrombus (DRT), all-cause death, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

Five hundred and five patients (mean age 69.5 ± 7.7 years; 230 [45.5%] female) were included, with 46 (9.1%) patients aged ≥80 years old (octogenarian group). Prevalence of paroxysmal AF (25 [54.3%] vs. 207 [45.1%], p < 0.001) and CHA2DS2VASc score (4.1 ± 1.3 vs. 3.1 ± 1.4, p < 0.0001) were higher in octogenarian patients. There were six cases (1.2%) of pericardial effusion (all in nonoctogenarian patients). At 3 months postprocedure, 437 patients underwent TEE/CT. Thirty-two (80%) octogenarian patients and 308 (77.6%) nonoctogenarian patients had no peri-device leak. After a mean follow-up of 26.9 ± 9.1 months, AF was documented in 10 (21.7%) patients in octogenarian group and in 103 (22.4%) patients in nonoctogenarian group (p = 0.99). The annual thromboembolic risk was 2.1% and 0.8% in the octogenarian group and nonoctogenarian group, respectively. Death occurred in 16 nonoctogenarian patients. One major bleeding was recorded in the octogenarian group.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of CA and LAAO in a single procedure is a feasible treatment option in octogenarians with comparable efficacy and safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure compared with oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched studies

Backgrounds

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the PROTECT-AF and the PREVAIL, showed that in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is comparable to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in the prevention of stroke and could also possibly reduce mortality. Nevertheless, this net clinical benefit was not confirmed in the most recent RCT comparing LAAC vs. OAC, the PRAGUE-17 trial.

Aim

aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAAC compared with OAC among available high-quality studies.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library) was performed to identify eligible RCTs and observational studies with propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Outcomes of interest were the occurrence of cardiovascular death (CVD), all-cause death, all-type stroke, and major bleedings.

Results

A total of 3 RCTs and 7 PMS studies involving 25,700 patients were identified. 12,961 patients received LAAC while 12,739 received OAC therapy. After a median follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 2-4.4), patients who received LAAC had lower risk of CVD (RR = 0.62; 95%CI, 0.51-0.74, I2 = 0%), all-cause death (RR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.78, I2 68%) and major bleedings (RR = 0.68; 95%CI, 0.48-0.95 I2 = 87%) compared with patients on OAC. No difference was found between the two groups regarding strokes incidence (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.15, I2 = 0%).

Conclusions

According to this meta-analysis, LAAC has comparable efficacy in the prevention of stroke compared with OAC and a reduced risk of major bleedings, all-cause death and CVD that may be even larger with longer follow-up.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269768, identifier CRD42021269768.

Progress in the study and treatment of peri-device leak after left atrial appendage closure

For patients with atrial fibrillation with an increased risk of stroke and contraindications to long-term anticoagulation, percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has become an important alternative to long-term oral anticoagulation. Incomplete closure of the LAAC during the procedure leads to faster blood flow in the interstitial space around the device, resulting in peri-device leak (PDL), which is not uncommon. Studies are still inconclusive in determining the incidence, long-term safety, and management of PDL. Therefore, this article reviewed the progress made in the research and treatment of PDL after LAAC.

Non-Pharmacological Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide. It is associated with increased mortality and morbidity, especially due to the increased risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in these patients. For this reason, thromboembolism prevention is the cornerstone of managing AF, and oral anticoagulation is nowadays the first-line treatment. However, since most thrombi form in the left atrial appendage and anticoagulant therapy may have side effects and be contraindicated in some patients, surgical and percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) have emerged as a non-pharmacological alternative. This review summarizes all existing evidence on surgical and percutaneous LAAO.

3-Year Outcomes From the Amplatzer Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder Randomized Controlled Trial (Amulet IDE)

BACKGROUND

The Amulet (Abbott) left atrial appendage occluder investigational device exemption trial is the largest randomized trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of the Amulet left atrial appendage occluder compared with the Watchman 2.5 device (Boston Scientific) through 5 years.

OBJECTIVES

This analysis evaluated the device effect on 3-year outcomes in the Amulet investigational device exemption trial.

METHODS

The medication regimen and key clinical outcomes were reported through 3 years including: 1) the composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (SE); 2) the composite of all strokes, SE, or cardiovascular (CV) death; 3) major bleeding; and 4) all-cause death and CV death.

RESULTS

A total of 1,878 patients at 108 sites were randomized. A significantly higher percentage of patients were free of oral anticoagulation usage at 3 years with Amulet (96.2%) vs Watchman (92.5%) (P < 0.01). Clinical outcomes were comparable for the composite of ischemic stroke or SE (5.0% vs 4.6%; P = 0.69); the composite of all strokes, SE, or CV death (11.1% vs 12.7%; P = 0.31); major bleeding (16.1% vs 14.7%; P = 0.46); all-cause death (14.6% vs 17.9%; P = 0.08); and CV death (6.6% vs 8.5%; P = 0.14) for Amulet and Watchman, respectively. Through 3 years, device factors (device-related thrombus or peridevice leak ≥3 mm) preceded ischemic stroke events and CV deaths more frequently in Watchman compared with Amulet patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The Amulet occluder demonstrated continued safety and effectiveness with over 96% free of oral anticoagulation usage through 3 years in a high-risk population compared to the Watchman device. (AMPLATZER Amulet LAA Occluder Trial [Amulet IDE]; NCT02879448).

Mechanisms, predictors, and evolution of severe peri-device leaks with two different left atrial appendage occluders

AIMS

Incomplete left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) due to peri-device leak (PDL) is a limitation of the therapy. The Amulet IDE trial is the largest randomized head-to-head trial comparing the Amulet and Watchman 2.5 LAAO devices with fundamentally different designs. The predictors and mechanistic factors impacting differences in PDLs within the Amulet IDE trial are assessed in the current analysis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An independent core lab analysed all images for the presence or absence of severe PDL (>5 mm). The incidence, mechanistic factors, predictors using propensity score-matched controls, and evolution of severe PDLs through 18 months were assessed. Of the 1878 patients randomized in the trial, the Amulet occluder had significantly fewer severe PDLs than the Watchman device at 45 days (1.1 vs. 3.2%, P < 0.001) and 12 months (0.1 vs. 1.1%, P < 0.001). Off-axis deployment or missed lobes were leading mechanistic PDL factors in each device group. Larger left atrial appendage (LAA) dimensions including orifice diameter, landing zone diameter, and depth predicted severe PDL with the Watchman device, with no significant anatomical limitations noted with the Amulet occluder. Procedural and device implant predictors were found with the Amulet occluder attributed to the learning curve with the device. A majority of Watchman device severe PDLs did not resolve over time through 18 months.

CONCLUSION

The dual-occlusive Amplatzer Amulet LAA occluder provided improved LAA closure compared with the Watchman 2.5 device. Predictors and temporal observations of severe PDLs were identified in the Amulet IDE trial.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier NCT02879448.

Direct current cardioversion practices following percutaneous left atrial appendage closure

INTRODUCTION

Among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) undergoing direct current cardioversion (DCCV), the need for and use of LAA imaging and oral anticoagulation (OAC) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the real-world use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) before DCCV and use of OAC pre- and post-DCCV in patients with AF status post percutaneous LAAC.

METHODS

This retrospective single center study included all patients who underwent DCCV after percutaneous LAAC from 2016 to 2022. Key measures were completion of TEE or CCTA pre-DCCV, OAC use pre- and post-DCCV, incidence of left atrial thrombus (LAT) or device-related thrombus (DRT), incidence of peri-device leak (PDL), and DCCV-related complications (stroke, systemic embolism, device embolization, major bleeding, or death) within 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients with AF and LAAC underwent 122 cases of DCCV. LAAC consisted of 47 (62%), 28 (37%), and 1 (1%) case of Watchman 2.5, Watchman FLX, and Lariat, respectively. Among the 122 DCCV cases, 31 (25%) cases were identified as "non-guideline based" due to: (1) no OAC for 3 weeks and no LAA imaging within 48 h before DCCV in 12 (10%) cases, (2) no OAC for 4 weeks following DCCV in 16 (13%) cases, or (3) both in 3 (2%) cases. Among the 70 (57%) cases that underwent TEE or CCTA before DCCV, 16 (23%) cases had a PDL with a mean size of 3.0 ± 1.1 mm, and 4 (6%) cases had a LAT/DRT on TEE resulting in cancellation. There were no DCCV-related complications within 30 days.

DISCUSSION

There is a widely varied practice pattern of TEE, CCTA, and OAC use with DCCV after LAAC, with a 6% rate of LAT/DRT. LAA imaging before DCCV appears prudent in all cases, especially within 1 year of LAAC, to assess for device position, PDL, and LAT/DRT.

Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Incomplete Endothelialization of a Left Atrial Appendage Occluder

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has become a preferred alternative for ischemic stroke prophylaxis in patients with a high risk of cardioembolic stroke but who are contraindicated for long-term anticoagulation. While the intervention has been successful in reducing bleeding events when compared to using anticoagulation, some stroke risk still persists. We present a case of stroke related to the failure of a left atrial appendage occluder, which was found to have a peri-device leak and incomplete endothelialization. In our case, we also believe these may have been exacerbated by comorbid severe mitral regurgitation. While current post-procedural protocols do address management of specific findings predictive of device failure, our patient still suffered from ischemic stroke despite following guidelines. Based on current outcome studies on LAAO, he may have been at higher risk than appreciated. His surveillance imaging at post-operative day 45 revealed a small peri-device leak of < 5 mm, which is now found to be associated with a higher embolic stroke risk than larger leaks of > 5 mm. Moreover, his mitral regurgitation, which was severe and borderline symptomatic, remained undertreated for a prolonged period. In cases of similar comorbidities, one might consider exploring the role of concomitant endovascular mitral repair and LAAO to optimize outcomes.

Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Devices Available, Pitfalls, Advantages, and Future Directions

Transcatheter left atrial appendage closure has emerged as a non-pharmacological alternative to long-term anticoagulation for stroke prevention in appropriately selected patients with AF. In this concise review, the Food and Drug Administration-approved and some other left atrial appendage closure devices that are under investigation are discussed. Currently, Watchman Flx and Amplatzer Amulet are the only two devices that have been approved for commercial use by the Food and Drug Administration. A brief overview of device designs, clinical data on efficacy and safety, major limitations of left atrial appendage closure devices, and perspectives on future direction are provided. The current generation of devices is effective; however, efforts should continue on innovations and refinement of device technology.

Appropriate Use Criteria of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices: Latest Evidences

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrythmia and it is linked to an increased risk of stroke. Even if anticoagulation therapy reduces the rate of stroke the benefits of this therapy have to been balanced with the increased risk of hemorrhagic event. Left atrial appendage closure is a valid alternative to long term anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and high hemorrhagic risk. Actually new devices with different features have been tested and introduced progressively in the clinical practice. Improvements preprocedural imaging evaluation and the learning curve of the operators led to percutaneous left atrial appendage closure a safe and effective procedure. A good knowledge of different devices and the technique of implant is necessary for optimization percutaneous left atrial appendage closure and the reduction of complications during the acute phase and follow up.

Left atrial appendage occlusion combined with cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation: One-year follow-up comparison

Background

A one-stop procedure involving catheter ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an option for high-risk atrial fibrillation patients. Few studies have reported the efficacy and safety of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) combined with LAAO, and no studies have compared the combination of LAAO with CBA or radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Methods

A total of 112 patients were enrolled in the present study; 45 patients received CBA combined with LAAO (group 1), and 67 patients received RFA combined with LAAO (group 2). Patient follow-up was performed for 1 year to detect peri-device leaks (PDLs) and safety outcomes (defined as a composite of peri-procedural and follow-up adverse events).

Results

The number of PDLs at the median 59 days follow-up was comparable between the two groups (33.3% in group 1 vs. 37.3% in group 2, p = 0.693). Safety outcomes were also comparable between the two groups (6.7% in group 1 vs. 7.5% in group 2, p = 1.000). Multivariable regression showed that PDLs risk and safety outcomes were all similar between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of PDLs indicated no significant differences. Follow-up safety outcomes were related to anticoagulant medication, and patients without PDLs were more likely to discontinue antithrombotic therapy. The total procedure and ablation times were all significantly shorter for group 1.

Conclusion

When compared with left atrial appendage occlusion combined with radiofrequency, left atrial appendage occlusion combined with cryoballoon ablation has the same risk of peri-device leaks and safety outcomes, but the procedure time was significantly reduced.

Peridevice Leak After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Incidence, Mechanisms, Clinical Impact, and Management

Left atrial appendage occlusion is an increasingly adopted stroke prevention strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, peridevice leaks after the procedure are not infrequent and have recently been shown to confer a higher risk for subsequent ischemic events. In this paper, the authors review the available research on the frequency, mechanisms, clinical significance, and management of peridevice leak after percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion.

The Year in Electrophysiology: Selected Highlights From 2022

This special article is the fifth in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors would like to thank the Editor-in-Chief, Dr Kaplan, the Associate Editor-in-Chief, Dr Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to author this series, which summarizes the key research papers in the electrophysiology (EP) field relevant to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesiologists. These articles are shaping perioperative EP procedures and practices, such as pulsed-field ablation, cryoablation for first-line treatment for atrial fibrillation, advancements in conduction system pacing, safety issues related to smartphones and cardiac implantable electronic devices, and alterations in EP workflow as the world emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic. Special emphasis is placed on the implications of these advancements for the anesthetic care of patients undergoing EP procedures.

Editor-in-Chief's Top Picks From 2022

Each week, I record audio summaries for every paper in JACC, as well as an issue summary. This process has become a true labor of love due to the time they require, but I am motivated by the sheer number of listeners (16 million plus), and it has allowed me to familiarize myself with every paper that we publish. Thus, I have selected the top 100 papers (both Original Investigations and Review Articles) from distinct specialties each year. In addition to my personal choices, I have included papers that have been the most accessed or downloaded on our websites, as well as those selected by the JACC Editorial Board members. In order to present the full breadth of this important research in a consumable fashion, we will present these abstracts in this issue of JACC, as well as their Central Illustrations and podcasts. The highlights comprise the following sections: Basic & Translational Research, Cardiac Failure & Myocarditis, Cardiomyopathies & Genetics, Cardio-Oncology, Congenital Heart Disease, Coronary Disease & Interventions, Coronavirus, Hypertension, Imaging, Metabolic & Lipid Disorders, Neurovascular Disease & Dementia, Promoting Health & Prevention, Rhythm Disorders & Thromboembolism, and Valvular Heart Disease.^1-100.

Two-Year Outcomes With a Next-Generation Left Atrial Appendage Device: Final Results of the PINNACLE FLX Trial

Background The PINNACLE FLX (Protection Against Embolism for Non-valvular AF [Atrial Fibrillation] Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA [Left Atrial Appendage] Closure Technology) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device (WATCHMAN FLX; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). At 1 year, the study met the primary end points of safety and anatomical efficacy/appendage closure. This final report of the PINNACLE FLX trial includes the prespecified secondary end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 2 years, also making it the first report of 2-year outcomes with this next-generation left atrial appendage closure device. Methods and Results Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women), with an appropriate rationale for left atrial appendage closure, were enrolled to receive the left atrial appendage closure device at 29 US centers. Adverse events were assessed by an independent clinical events committee, and imaging was assessed by independent core laboratories. Among 395 implanted patients (36% women; mean age, 74 years; CHA₂DS₂-VASc, 4.2±1.5), the secondary efficacy end point of 2-year ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was met, with an absolute rate of 3.4% (annualized rate, 1.7%) and an upper 1-sided 95% confidence bound of 5.3%, which was superior to the 8.7% performance goal. Two-year rates of adverse events were as follows: 9.3% all-cause mortality, 5.5% cardiovascular death, 3.4% all stroke, and 10.1% major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5). There were no additional systemic embolisms, device embolizations, pericardial effusions, or symptomatic device-related thrombi after 1 year. Conclusions The secondary end point of 2-year stroke or systemic embolism was met at 3.4%. In these final results of the PINNACLE FLX trial, the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX device demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy outcomes.