Same day discharge after structural heart disease interventions in the era of the coronavirus-19 pandemic and beyond

Single-Operator Left atrial appendage Occlusion utilizing Conscious sedation TEE, Lack of Outpatient pre-imaging, and Same-day Expedited discharge (SOLO-CLOSE): A comparison with conventional approach

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with WATCHMAN currently requires preprocedural imaging, general anesthesia, and inpatient overnight admission. We sought to facilitate simplification of LAAO.

AIMS

We describe and compare SOLO-CLOSE (single-operator LAA occlusion utilizing conscious sedation TEE, lack of outpatient pre-imaging, and same-day expedited discharge) with the conventional approach (CA).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis of 163 patients undergoing LAAO between January 2017 and April 2022 was conducted. The SOLO-CLOSE protocol was enacted on December 1, 2020. Before this date, we utilized the CA. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as successful LAAO with ≤5 mm peri-device leak at time of closure. The primary safety endpoint was the composite incidence of all-cause deaths, any cerebrovascular accident (CVA), device embolization, pericardial effusion, or major postprocedure bleeding within 7 days of the index procedure. Procedure times, 7-day readmission rates, and cost analytics were collected as well.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in both cohorts. Congestive heart failure (37.5% vs. 11.1%) and malignancy (28.8% vs. 12.5%) were higher in SOLO-CLOSE. Median CHA2D2SVASc score was 5 in both cohorts. The primary efficacy endpoint was met 100% in both cohorts. Primary safety endpoint was similar between cohorts (p = 0.078). Mean procedure time was 30 min shorter in SOLO-CLOSE (p < 0.01). Seven-day readmissions for SOLO-CLOSE was zero. After SOLO-CLOSE implementation, there was a 188% increase in positive contribution margin per case.

CONCLUSIONS

The SOLO-CLOSE methodology offers similar efficacy and safety when compared to the CA, while improving clinical efficiency, reducing procedural times, and increasing economic benefit.

Same-day discharge after percutaneous closure of persistent foramen ovale using intracardiac echocardiography and the Gore Septal Occluder

Aim

Periprocedural and postinterventional care of patients undergoing closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) varies significantly across care providers. Same-day discharge (SDD) after transcatheter interventions is an evolving concept. This study aimed to assess the same-day discharge rate and incidence of complications in patients undergoing PFO closure with intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) using the Gore®Cardioform Septal Occluder (GSO) device. The secondary aim was to analyse the efficacy of femoral vein closure with Perclose ProGlide.

Methods

Patients who underwent PFO closure with the GSO device at a university hospital in Stockholm, Sweden, were retrospectively included between March 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, all with cryptogenic stroke as the indication for the procedure. All patients underwent PFO closure with conscious sedation and local anaesthesia. The indication for all patients was a cryptogenic stroke. Periprocedural imaging was performed using ICE and fluoroscopy in all patients. Patient characteristics and periprocedural data were collected from patient charts. Patients were kept on bed rest for 4-6 h post-intervention. Transthoracic echocardiography and clinical examination, including groin status, were performed before discharge. No clinical routine follow-up was performed the day following the intervention. Clinical follow-up was done by phone call two weeks after the procedure, and echocardiographic follow-up was done after 12 months. Data were analysed using linear and logistic regression models.

Results

In total, 262 patients were included, of which 246 (94%) had SDD. 166 patients (63%) received the ProGlide™ system for femoral vein access closure. Post-procedural arrhythmias occurred in 17 (6%) patients, and vascular complications in 9 patients (3%). The overall closure rate at follow-up was 98.5%. 25 out of 264 patients (9.5%) had to be readmitted within the first eight weeks after PFO closure, 16 due to atrial fibrillation warranting electric cardioversion, one due to an arteriovenous fistula that was operated, four due to chest pain/pain at the access site, and four patients developed fever. There was no difference in SDD among patients who received ProGlide™ vs. patients who did not receive ProGlide™.

Conclusion

SDD appears safe after transcatheter PFO closure with the GSO device with high procedural success rates. Low rates of complications and readmissions make the intervention suitable for this patient-friendly and cost-effective concept.

In-hospital complications after MitraClip in patients with heart failure and preserved versus reduced ejection fraction in the United States

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits of transcatheter edge to edge mitral valve repair have been well established in patients with heart failure and severe mitral regurgitation (MR) who have prohibitive surgical risk. In March of 2019, the FDA approved the MitraClip for treatment of selected patients with HF and severe secondary MR. However, the relative outcomes of patients with HFrEF and HFpEF treated with MitraClip are largely unknown. We therefore sought to investigate the incidence and characteristics of in-hospital mortality in patients with HFpEF and HFrEF following MitraClip.

METHODS

The study sample analyzed was originated from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) registry which includes data from hospitalized patients in the United States (US) between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2020. Data were extracted from the entire NIS registry using ICD-9 codes. Patients with the primary or secondary diagnosis of MitraClip were identified. Hospitalizations for HFpEF and HFrEF were identified based on ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes. Demographics, conventional risk factors, and in-hospital outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

23,260 hospitalizations for MitraClip implantation between 2016 and 2020 were analyzed. The HFrEF group had higher absolute rates of complications as well as a higher observed in-hospital mortality (2.4 % vs 1.7 %; OR 0.75 95 % CI 0.44-1.26; p 0.28) which did not meet statistical significance. Absolute rates of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute kidney injury (AKI) and respiratory failure necessitating invasive mechanical ventilation were observed to be higher among HFrEF patients. Post-procedural shock was significantly more common in patients with HFrEF (9.0 % vs 2.8 %: OR 0.34 95 % CI 0.25-0.48 p < 0.001). Significantly longer hospitalizations were observed in the HFrEF cohort (5.3 ± 11.2 days vs 4.2 ± 7.3 days; p < 0.001) as well as a higher total hospitalization cost (61,723 ± 56,728 USD vs 57,278 ± 46,143).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study of US patients, those with HFrEF were observed to have statistically higher risk of in-hospital post-procedural shock and longer hospitalization length of stay when compared with patients with HFpEF who underwent MitraClip implantation. Additionally, patients with HFrEF undergoing MitraClip procedure were observed to have higher absolute rates of certain post-procedural complications, however these observations did not reach statistical significance. Understanding of the aforementioned differences after MitraClip implantation may be useful in-patient selection, prognostic guidance, and hypothesis generation to propel future large clinical studies.

Same-day discharge after elective percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale

Percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ovale (PFO) is increasingly performed in specific patients with cryptogenic stroke or clinical evidence of a paradoxical embolism. This study was performed to determine the safety of same-day discharge (SDD) following such procedures. This is a prospective, observational study of patients undergoing elective percutaneous PFO closure in a single tertiary center in Portugal between January 2020 and July 2023. AmplatzerTM devices (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) and NobblestichTM EL (HeartStitch, Inc., Fountain Valley, CA, USA) were used. After 6 months, the following events were looked at: post-procedural paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, stroke, unplanned cardiac re-hospitalization, urgent cardiac surgery, major vascular complications, pericardial effusions, device embolization, and death. We studied 122 consecutive patients (52% female, 68; 48±12 years old) who had elective percutaneous closure with success and no complications. Forty-nine (40%) had SDD. AmplatzerTM devices were used more frequently in the SDD group, while NobblestichTM EL was more common in the overnight group. During the overnight group's follow-up period, there was one non-cardiovascular death; there were no further events. SDD after elective percutaneous closure of PFO was shown to be a safe and successful patient management method, including NobblestichTM, which we describe for the first time. Our results prove the safety of this same-day discharge strategy. We hypothesize that in the near future, in selected cases, PFO closure might become an ambulatory procedure.

Transesophageal echocardiography-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided patent foramen ovale closure: A single center registry

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is conventionally performed under continuous transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) guidance. We aimed to evaluate whether a simplified procedural approach, including pure fluoroscopy-guidance and final TEE control, as well as an aimed 'next-day-discharge' is comparable with the conventional TEE-guided procedure in terms of periprocedural and intermediate-term outcomes.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a PFO closure at our center between 2010 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Prior to June 2019 cases were performed with continuous TEE guidance (TEE-guided group). Since June 2019, only pure fluoroscopy-guided PFO closures have been performed with TEE insertion and control just prior to device release (fluoroscopy-guided group). We analyzed procedural aspects, as well as long term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

In total 291 patients were included in the analysis: 197 in the TEE-guided group and 94 in the fluoroscopy-guided group. Fluoroscopy-guided procedures were markedly shorter (48 ± 20 min vs. 25 ± 9 min; p < .01). There was no difference in procedural complications, including death, major bleeding, device dislodgement, stroke or clinically relevant peripheral embolization between the two groups (.5% vs. 0%; p = .99). Hospital stay was also shorter with the simplified approach (2.5 ± 1.6 vs. 3.5 ± 1.2 days; p < .01), allowing 85% same-day discharges during the last 12 months of observation period. At 6 ± 3 months echocardiographic follow-up a residual leakage was described in 8% of the TEE-guided cases and 2% of the fluoroscopy-guided cases (p = .08).

CONCLUSION

While a complete TEE-free PFO closure might have potential procedural risks, our approach of pure fluoroscopy-guided with a brisk final TEE check seems to be advantageous in terms of procedural aspects with no sign of any acute or intermediate-term hazard and it could offer an equitable compromise between the two worlds: a complete TEE procedure and a procedure without any TEE.