Combining left atrial appendage closure and catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: 2-year outcomes from a multinational registry

Pulsed-field ablation of pulmonary vein and left atrial posterior wall combined with left atrial appendage occlusion as single procedure

Pulmonary vein isolation and left atrial posterior wall ablation using the Farapulse system, followed by left atrial appendage occlusion, have been achieved as single combined procedure to treat long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation in a patient at high hemorrhagic risk.

Left atrial appendage closure in conjunction with radiofrequency ablation: Effects on left atrial functioning in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Objective

In the present study, we investigated the impact of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) following catheter ablation (CA) on the left atrial structure and functioning of patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

Patients with paroxysmal AF were enrolled in this single-center prospective cohort study between April 2015 and July 2021; 353 patients received CA alone, while 93 patients received CA in combination with Watchman LAAC. We used age, gender, CHA2DS2-VASc, and HAS-BLED scores as well as other demographic variables to perform propensity score matching. Patients with paroxysmal AF were randomly assigned to the CA combined with Watchman LAAC group (combined treatment group) and the simple CA group, with 89 patients in each group. The left atrial structure, reserve, ventricular diastole, and pump functions and their changes in patients were assessed using routine Doppler echocardiography and 2D speckle tracking echocardiography over the course of a 1-year follow-up.

Results

At 1-week follow-up, the reserve, ventricular diastole, and pump functions of the left atrium (LA) increased in both groups; these functions were gradually restored at the 1- to 3-month follow-up; they were close to or returned to their pre-operative levels at the 3-month follow-up; and no significant differences were found compared with the pre-operative levels at the 12-month follow-up. In the first 3 months, the reserve (Ƹ, SRs) and pump functions (SRa) in the combined treatment group decreased significantly when compared with the simple CA group, and the differences were statistically significant.

Conclusion

Patients with paroxysmal AF may experience a short term, partial effect of LAAC on LA reserve and pump functions, which are gradually restored and the effect disappears by 12 months.

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.

Combined atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure: Watchman vs. LAmbre devices

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) combined with radiofrequency catheter ablation is an emerging one-stop hybrid procedure for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). This study was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of the Watchman device vs. the LAmbre device for this combined procedure.

METHODS

Two hundred and thirty two patients with AF who underwent the combined procedure were enrolled and divided into two subgroups depending on the device choice: the Watchman-combined group (n = 118) and the LAmbre-combined group (n = 114). The periprocedural and follow-up adverse events in both groups were documented.

RESULTS

The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score and HAS-BLED score in the Watchman-combined group and LAmbre-combined group were 3.7 ± 1.5 vs. 3.8 ± 1.5 and 2.5 ± 1.1 vs. 2.3 ± 1.1, respectively (all P > 0.05). Successful LAAC was achieved in all patients. The rate of major periprocedural complications and AF recurrence at 6 months post-procedure were similar between the Watchman-combined group and LAmbre-combined group (0.8 vs. 0.9%, P = 1.00; 22.0 vs. 15.8%, P = 0.23). During 2.6 ±0 .7 vs.1.6 ± 1.6 years follow-up, the rate of major clinical adverse events, including stroke and major bleeding, were comparable between the Watchman-combined group and the LAmbre-combined group (2.6 vs. 1.1% per 100 patient-years, P = 0.33). The intraprocedural peri-device leakage (PDL) rate was similar between the Watchman-combined group and the LAmbre-combined group (5.1 vs. 6.1%, P = 0.73), but the PDL rate was significantly higher at 3-6 months transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) follow-up than the intraprocedural PDL rate in both groups (21.6 vs. 5.1%; 36.6 vs. 6.1%, respectively), with a more obvious increase in minimal PDL rate in the LAmbre-combined group than the Watchman-combined group (36.6 vs. 21.6%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The Watchman and LAmbre devices were comparable in efficacy and safety for the combined procedure. The minimal PDL rate at short-term TEE follow-up was higher in the LAmbre-combined group than the Watchman-combined group.

Concomitant transcatheter occlusion versus thoracoscopic surgical clipping for left atrial appendage in patients undergoing ablation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis

Background

Both catheter left atrial appendage occlusion combined with ablation (COA) and thoracoscopic surgical left atrial appendage clipping combined with ablation (TCA) have shown favorable outcomes in management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib). However, studies comparing the endpoints of both techniques are still lacking. Herein, a meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes of COA versus TCA was performed in patients with AFib.

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched for retrieving potential publications. The primary outcome was the incidence of stroke during follow-up period of at least 12 months. Secondary outcomes were acute success rate of complete left atrial appendage (LAA) closure by COA or TCA, postprocedural mortality and complications, and all-cause mortality during follow-up period of at least 12 months.

Results

19 studies of COA containing 1,504 patients and 6 studies of TCA with 454 patients were eligible for analysis. No significant difference in stroke and all-cause mortality was found in patients undergoing COA versus TCA after at least a 12-month follow-up (stroke: p = 0.504; all-cause mortality: p = 0.611). COA group had a higher acute success rate compared with TCA group (p = 0.001). COA placed the patients at a higher risk of hemorrhage during the postprocedural period compared with TCA (p = 0.023). A similar risk of other postprocedural complications (stroke/transient ischemic attack and pericardial effusion) and mortality was found in the COA group in comparison with TCA group (p>0.05).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that COA and TCA did not differ in stroke prevention and all-cause mortality in patients with AFib after a follow-up of at least 12 months. Postprocedural complications and mortality were almost comparable between the two groups. In the near future, high-quality randomized controlled trials exploring the optimal surgical strategies for AFib and endpoints of different procedures are warranted.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42022325497].

Bailout left atrial appendage occluder for pulmonary vein isolation and electrical cardioversion in patients with atrial fibrillation and left atrial appendage thrombus: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Cardioversion and catheter-based circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) are established rhythm control treatment strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, these treatments are contraindicated for AF patients with a left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus.

METHODS

We conducted the first-in-man case series study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of performing cardioversion or CPVI in AF patients with LAA thrombus immediately after implantation of LAA Occluder (LAAO) in a combined procedure. In our multi-center LAAO registry of 310 patients, 27 symptomatic and drug-refractory AF patients underwent a combined procedure of LAAO and CPVI, among whom 10 (mean age 68 ± 16 years, 6 men) having anticoagulant-resistant LAA thrombus received a bailout procedure of LAAO implantation first then CPVI, and the other 17 patients without LAA thrombus received CPVI first then LAAO for comparison.

RESULTS

The mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score and HAS-BLED score were comparable between these two groups. In patients with LAA thrombus, we put carotid filters and did a no-touch technique, neither advancing the wire and sheath into the LAA nor performing LAA angiography. After LAAO implantation, the connecting cable was still connected to the occluder when cardioversion was performed. During CPVI, the occluder location was registered in the LA geometry by three-dimensional mapping to guide the catheter not to touch the LAAO. The procedure was successful in all the patients without intra-procedural complications. After a mean follow-up of 1.7 ± 0.7 years, there was no device embolization, peri-device leak ≧ 5 mm or stroke event in both groups. The AF recurrence rate was also similar between the two groups (P = 0.697).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that cardioversion or CPVI is doable in symptomatic AF patients with LAA thrombus if LAA was occluded ahead as a bailout procedure.

Comparative analysis of left atrial appendage closure efficacy and outcomes by CHA2DS2-VASc score group in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Background

Higher CHA₂DS₂-VASc score is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardio-cerebrovascular events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), regardless of oral anticoagulation (OAC) status. However, whether this association still exists in patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is unknown. We evaluated the impact of CHA₂DS₂-VASc score on LAAC efficacy and outcomes.

Methods

A total of 401 consecutive patients undergoing LAAC were included and divided into 3 groups based on CHA₂DS₂-VASc score (0–2, 3–4, and ≥5). Baseline characteristics, periprocedural complications, and long-term outcomes were collected and compared across all groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in implantation success, periprocedural complications, and long-term outcomes across all score groups. Kaplan-Meier estimation showed that the cumulative ratio of freedom from all-cause mortality (P = 0.146), cardiovascular mortality (P = 0.519), and non-cardiovascular mortality (P = 0.168) did not differ significantly by CHA₂DS₂-VASc score group. LAAC decreased the risks of thromboembolism and major bleeding, resulting in a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 82.4% (P < 0.001) and 66.7% (P < 0.001) compared with expected risks in the overall cohort, respectively. Subgroup analysis indicated that observed risks of thromboembolism and major bleeding were significantly lower than the expected risks in score 3–4 and score ≥5 groups, respectively. The level of RRR increased with CHA₂DS₂-VASc score (P < 0.001 for trend) for thromboembolism but not for major bleeding (P = 0.2729 for trend).

Conclusion

Patients with higher CHA₂DS₂-VASc score did not experience worse outcomes, which may be partly attributed to more benefits provided by LAAC intervention in such patients compared to those with a low score.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Yields Favorable Cardio- and Cerebrovascular Outcomes in Patients With Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation and Prior Stroke

Introduction: Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and previous stroke are at significantly higher risk of stroke recurrence. Data on the efficacy of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) on these patients is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences of LAAC efficacy on long-term cardio- and cerebrovascular outcomes in NVAF patients with vs. without prior stroke.

Methods: Three hundred and seventy consecutive NVAF patients who underwent LAAC were enrolled and divided into stroke and non-stroke groups based on history of previous stroke. Endpoints, such as thromboembolism, major bleeding, and mortality post-LAAC, were followed up among groups.

Results: Patients in the stroke group had higher mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores compared to the non-stroke group (5.1 vs. 3.6 and 4.1 vs. 3.4, both P < 0.001, respectively). Over a median follow-up of 2.2 years, there were no significant differences in incidence rates of thromboembolism, device-related thrombus (DRT), major bleeding, and combined efficacy endpoints between the two groups. In both stroke and non-stroke groups, LAAC decreased the risk of thromboembolism [relative risk reduction (RRR) 87.5%, P = 0.034, and 74.6%, P = 0.004, respectively] and major bleeding (RRR 68.8%, P = 0.034, and 68.6%, P = 0.007, respectively) compared with predicted risk. The RRR in thromboembolism was greater in patients with vs. without prior stroke (OR 2.45, 95% CI: 1.20–5.12, P = 0.016). The incidence rates of all-cause mortality and non-cardiovascular death were similar between the two groups, but the risks of cardiovascular death post-LAAC both before (1.4% vs. 8.1%, respectively, P = 0.038) and after adjustment for confounding factors (P = 0.048) were significantly decreased in the stroke group.

Conclusions: Patients with vs. without prior stroke did not exhibit a worse clinical prognosis after LAAC. LAAC may provide an increased benefit in cardio-cerebrovascular outcomes in patients with previous stroke compared to those without previous stroke. Further research is necessary to evaluate the efficacy of LAAC in this field.

Effect of Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation on Left Atrial Function for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Background: A single procedure combining left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) plus catheter ablation (CA) has been proven to be safe and feasible for treating atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the influence of treatment modality on left atrial (LA) function is not thoroughly explained.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the changes of LA function in persistent AF patients undergoing concomitant LAAC and CA.

Methods: The study population comprised 65 patients who underwent combined AF ablation and Watchman LAAC (combined therapy group) in our center, and 65 participants of the AF simple ablation group who were matched based on sex, age, CHA₂DS₂-VASc score and HAS-BLED score using propensity score matching. During the 1-year follow-up period, two-dimensional echocardiography and speckle tracking echocardiography were performed to assess LA reservoir, conduit, and contractile function.

Results: The combined therapy was associated with a significant improvement in the LA reservoir function with increased expansion index and strain indices, including strain and strain rate (SR) during ventricular systole. Conduit function with SR during early ventricular diastole was also improved, as was contractile function with active atrial emptying fraction and SR during atrial systole. Similarly, LA reservoir and contractile function indices all improved continuously during follow-up after catheter ablation alone. At 3 months follow-up LA reservoir and conduit function with strain indices had a tendency to improve only in the simple procedure group. At 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in either LA volumes or strain indices between the two groups.

Conclusion: Both the combined therapy group and the simple ablation group demonstrated significant improvement in LA function. Based upon the fact that LA function was improved in both groups it might be concluded that most of the effects appeared to result from ablation, not LAAC; furthermore the additional LAAC procedure did not affect the improvement of LA function after CA.

Combination of ablation and left atrial appendage closure as "One-stop" procedure in the treatment of atrial fibrillation: Current status and future perspective

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia, is a major cause of stroke and systemic embolism. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been proved to be noninferior to traditional Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as well as novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which is becoming an important alternative to prevent stroke in non‐valvular AF. Catheter‐based AF ablation (CA) is recommended to be a standard of care in patients with AF refractory to drug therapy due to a better rhythm control and improvement of life quality than antiarrhythmic drugs. Theoretically, the one‐stop combination with LAAC and CA tends to bring more benefits in patients with AF, as it not only relieves symptoms, but also reduces the risk of stroke significantly. However, several important questions still need to be considered in the combination procedure although quite a few attempts have already been made in clinical practice. This review provides a comprehensive update on the concept, technique, perioperative management, benefits and other critical issues of the “one‐stop” procedure.

Stroke prevention strategies in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation

Effective stroke prevention with oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the cornerstone of the management of patients with atrial fibrillation. The use of OAC reduces the risk of stroke and death. For most patients with atrial fibrillation without moderate or severe mitral valve stenosis or prosthetic mechanical heart valves, treatment options include vitamin K antagonists, such as warfarin, and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Although most guidelines generally recommend NOACs as the first-line OAC, caution is required in some groups of patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding who have been under-represented or not studied in the randomized clinical trials on NOACs for stroke prevention. In addition to OAC, non-pharmacological, percutaneous therapies, including left atrial appendage occlusion, for stroke prevention have emerged, sometimes used in combination with catheter ablation for the treatment of the atrial fibrillation. High-risk groups of patients with atrial fibrillation include patients with end-stage renal failure (including those receiving dialysis), extremely old patients (such as those aged >80 years with multiple risk factors for bleeding), patients with dementia or those living in a long-term care home, patients with previous intracranial bleeding or recent acute bleeding (such as gastrointestinal bleeding), patients with acute ischaemic stroke and patients with an intracardiac thrombus. This Review provides an overview of stroke prevention strategies, including left atrial appendage occlusion, in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding.

Combined Therapy of Catheter Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Case-Control Study

Aim

The feasibility and safety of performing the combined procedure of catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) for atrial fibrillation (AF) have been reported by observational studies without controls. The aim of this study was to compare the procedural and long-term outcomes of combined procedures with isolated CA or LAAC.

Methods and Results

This study included patients who underwent combined CA and LAAC (combined group), CA alone (CA-only group), or LAAC alone (LAAC-only group). Propensity score matching was used to select controls from the CA-only and LAAC-only groups. Each group contained 76 subjects. The procedures were successfully performed in all the patients. Procedure-related complications of the combined group included one pericardial effusion and two groin haematomas, which did not differ significantly with those of the CA-only group (3.9% vs. 2.6%, P=0.650) or the LAAC-only group (3.9% vs. 2.6%, P=0.650), respectively. The AF-free rate of the combined group was comparable with that of the CA-only group after a mean of 2 years follow-up (67.1% vs. 69.7%, P=0.727). Compared with the LAAC-only group, the combined group achieved similar complete occlusion rate at implant (94.7% vs. 93.4%) and at 45 days (82.9% vs. 85.5%). At the end of follow-up, ischemic stroke and bleeding events of the combined group were low (3.9%) and were comparable with those of the CA-only group (5.3%) and the LAAC-only group (2.6%).

Conclusions

The combination of AF-CA and LAAC is safe and efficacious compared with single procedures alone.