Comparison of the Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients Aged <75 Versus Those Aged ≥75 Years (from a Nationwide Cohort Sample)

Left atrial appendage occlusion in vulnerable oldest-old patients - Effectiveness and safety in a large single-center registry

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Complex periprocedural approaches contrast with the need of oldest-old patients to keep medical procedures simple and short. This study investigates the effectiveness and safety of a simplified non-complex LAAO procedure.

METHODS

All patients who received an LAAO procedure at our center since 2014 with available follow-up data were retrospectively assessed concerning effectiveness in preventing all-cause death, stroke, or systemic embolism (i.e., effectiveness outcome). Safety was primarily evaluated by major bleeding (i.e., ≥ BARC type 3). Oldest-old patients (i.e., ≥ 80 years of age) were compared with younger patients.

RESULTS

43.0 % of 230 patients were oldest-olds. High technical success rate was achieved in both groups (oldest-olds 96.0 vs. younger patients 98.5 %; p = 0.41). Major complications occurred in 8.1 vs. 3.8 % of patients (p = 0.17). Effectiveness outcome was achieved in 70.7 vs. 82.4 % of patients (p = 0.035; mean follow-up 428 (100; 1007) and 382 (179; 1192) days). Oldest-old patients trended to an excess mortality (22.2 vs. 13.0 %; p = 0.064) and more ischemic strokes (10.1 vs. 3.8 %; p = 0.056). This was not associated with peri-device leaks ≥ 5 mm or device-related thromboses (2.0 vs. 1.5 %; p = 1.00). Major bleeding occurred in 9.1 vs. 7.6 % of patients over total follow-up (p = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-complex LAAO procedure achieved a state-of-the-art technical success rate and a low complication rate in vulnerable oldest-old patients. Care should be taken to identify patients with sufficient life expectancy to benefit from LAAO. The trend towards more ischemic strokes during follow-up is an important signal focusing on cardioembolic stroke etiologies besides LAA thrombi in these patients.

Current Strategies for Atrial Fibrillation Prevention and Management: Taming the Commonest Cardiac Arrhythmia

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest cardiac arrhythmia, constituting a major cause of morbidity and mortality, with an age-dependent incidence and prevalence ranging from 1-2% in the general population to ~10% in persons aged >60 years. The global prevalence of AF is rapidly increasing, mostly due to the aging population. If not properly and timely managed, this arrhythmia adversely affects left ventricular function, increases the risk of stroke five-fold, impairs quality of life, and shortens longevity. There is a genetic, hence non-modifiable, predisposition to the arrhythmia, while several life-style and cardiometabolic inciting factors, such as hypertension, heart failure, coronary disease, metabolic syndrome, alcohol use, and thyroid disorders, can be addressed, attesting to the importance of a holistic approach to its management. Thromboembolism is a serious consequence of AF, which could lead to a disabling stroke or have a lethal outcome. The risk of a thromboembolic complication can be estimated as based on a scoring system that takes into consideration the patient's age, previous thromboembolic events, and clinical comorbidities. In addition, rapid AF could affect cardiac performance, leading to an elusive type of arrhythmia- induced cardiomyopathy and heart failure with grave consequences if undetected and untreated. Furthermore, AF may cause silent brain infarcts and/or its hemodynamic perturbations can account for a type of dementia that needs to be taken into account, emphasizing the need for AF screening and prevention strategies. All these issues are herein detailed, the causes of the arrhythmia are tabulated, and an algorithm illustrates our current approach to its management.

State-of-the-Art of Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an increasingly used alternative to oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation, especially in patients with absolute/relative contraindications to these therapies. This review will cover three main aspects of the procedure. In the fist part of the manuscript, we focus on patient selection. We describe three main categories of patients with primary indication to LAAO, namely patients with previous or at a high risk of intracerebral bleeding, patients with a history of major gastrointestinal bleeding and patients with end-stage renal disease and absolute contraindication to novel oral anticoagulants. Some other potential indications are also described. In the second part of the manuscript, we review available devices, trying to highlight different aspects and potential specific advantages. The last section overviews different ways for pre-, intra- and postprocedural imaging, in order to improve procedural safety and efficacy and ameliorate patient outcome. The characteristics of available contemporary devices and the role of imaging in procedural planning, intraprocedural guidance and follow-up are described.

Initial Japanese Multicenter Experience and Age-Related Outcomes Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure: The OCEAN-LAAC Registry

Background

Limited data are available describing left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and age-related outcomes in Asians.

Objectives

This study summarizes the initial experience with LAAC in Japan and determines age-related clinical outcomes in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous LAAC.

Methods

In an ongoing, prospective, investigator-initiated, multicenter, observational registry of patients undergoing LAAC in Japan, we analyzed short-term clinical outcomes in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAC. Patients were classified into younger, middle-aged, and elderly groups (≤70, 70 to 80, and >80 years of age, respectively) to determine age-related outcomes.

Results

Patients (n = 548; mean age, 76.4 ± 8.1 years; male, 70.3%) who underwent LAAC at 19 Japanese centers between September 2019 and June 2021 were enrolled in the study, including 104, 271, and 173 patients in the younger, middle-aged, and elderly groups, respectively. Participants had a high-risk of bleeding and thromboembolism with a mean CHADS2 score of 3.1 ± 1.3, a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.7 ± 1.5, and a mean HAS-BLED score of 3.2 ± 1.0. Device success rates were 96.5% and anticoagulants discontinuation at the 45-day follow-up was achieved in 89.9%. In-hospital outcomes were not significantly different, but major bleeding events during the 45-day follow-up were significantly higher in the elderly group compared to the other groups (younger vs middle-aged vs elderly, 1.0% vs 3.7% vs 6.9%, respectively; P = 0.047) despite the same postoperative drug regimens.

Conclusions

The initial Japanese experience with LAAC demonstrated safety and efficacy; however, perioperative bleeding events were more common in the elderly and postoperative drug regimens must be tailored (OCEAN-LAAC [Optimized Catheter Valvular Intervention-Left Atrial Appendage Closure] registry; UMIN000038498).

Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly >75 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there is a limited understanding of LAAC in elderly patients (≥75 years old). We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the procedural complications and long-term outcomes after LAAC in the elderly versus the non-elderly. Methods: We screened PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Procedural endpoints of interest included successful implantation LAAC rates, in-hospital mortality, major bleeding events, pericardial effusion/tamponade, stroke, and vascular access complications related to LAAC. Long-term outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding events, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) during follow-up. Results: Finally, 12 studies were included in the analysis; these included a total of 25,094 people in the elderly group and 36,035 people in the non-elderly group. The successful implantation LAAC rates did not differ between the groups, while the elderly patients experienced more periprocedural mortality (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.79−3.83, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), pericardial effusion/tamponade (OR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.06−1.82, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), major bleeding events (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.17−1.48, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), and vascular access complications (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.16−1.55, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) than the non-elderly patients. The long-term stroke/TIA rates did not differ between the elderly and the non-elderly at least one year after follow-up. Conclusions: Even though successful implantation LAAC rates are similar, elderly patients have a significantly higher incidence of periprocedural mortality, major bleeding events, vascular access complications, and pericardial effusion/tamponade after LAAC than non-elderly patients. The stroke/TIA rates did not differ between both groups after at least one-year follow-up.