Initial results of transcatheter modification of left atrial appendage by obliteration with device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: Real-world data from the TERMINATOR registry

Safety and feasibility of atrial fibrillation ablation after left atrial appendage closure: A single-center experience of the left atrial appendage closure first strategy

Background

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are not suitable for long-term anticoagulant therapy undergo percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). The safety and feasibility of left atrial catheter ablation (CA) procedures after LAAC remain unclear. This study aimed to clarify the feasibility and safety of CA after LAAC, including in the early phase within 180 days.

Methods

Characteristics and clinical outcomes of 46 patients with AF who had undergone both CA and LAAC within 2 years (mean age, 72 years; 29 men) were compared between those who had undergone CA-first (31 patients) and LAAC-first (15 patients).

Results

The mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.8 and 3.3 points, respectively. The LAAC-first strategy was often used in patients with prior major bleeding and LAA thrombosis or sludge. In the LAAC-first group, the mean duration between both procedures was 212 days, and all LAAC-first patients, including seven patients in the early phase, could undergo CA without LAAC device-related complications; moreover, no cardiovascular adverse events were reported after both procedures (mean periods: 420 days). After CA post-LAAC, no device-related adverse events (device-related thrombosis, new peri-device leak appearance, peri-device leak increase, or device dislodgement) were observed, whereas, after LAAC post-CA, 3 new peri-device leak appearance events and 1 peri-device leak increase event were observed, especially patients who underwent LAAC in the early phase post-CA.

Conclusion

Based on single-center experience, left atrial CA in the presence of an LAAC device implanted including the early phase was safe and feasible.

Comparison of left atrial appendage measurements between conventional transesophageal echocardiography and "Virtual TEE" reconstructed from computed tomography for pre-procedural planning of device closure

For pre-procedural planning of left atrial appendage (LAA) closure, sizing is crucial. Although transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is a standard modality, cardiac computed tomography (CT) is also widely used. The virtual TEE (V-TEE) that our group developed enables us to reconstruct images similar to TEE images from CT images. The software should be helpful to understand and plan the procedure strategy. Accordingly, we investigated the utility of V-TEE. Sixty-six patients at 4 participating sites who completed both CT and TEE prior to LAA closure were included. The LAA diameter at the landing zone (LZ) for WATCHMAN™ device implantation was statistically compared at 0°, 45°, 90°, and 135° between V-TEE and TEE. Among 66 cases, only 3 cases were excluded due to poor imaging quality, and 63 cases were analyzed. The device LZ diameters based on V-TEE were strongly correlated with those based on TEE, despite the significantly greater diameter based on V-TEE with mean differences of 2.4 to 3.0 mm (all of them: P < 0.001). The discordances (V-TEE/TEE ratio) at most angles were significantly larger in the elliptical LAAs. V-TEE provides a valuable method for the evaluation of the LAA diameters. V-TEE-based measurements were larger than conventional TEE-based measurements, especially in cases of elliptical LAAs. The assessment by V-TEE has the potential benefit of ensuring proper device sizing regardless of the LAA morphology.