Impact of Echocardiographic Guidance on Safety and Efficacy of Left Atrial Appendage Closure: An Observational Study

Pericardial Effusion After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Timing, Predictors, and Clinical Impact

BACKGROUND

Pericardial effusion (PE) is the most common serious left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) complication, but its mechanisms, time course, and prognostic impact are poorly understood.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the frequency, timing, predictors and clinical impact of PE after LAAC.

METHODS

Data on consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous LAAC between 2009 and 2022 were prospectively collected including the 1-year follow-up. Both single (Watchman 2.5/FLX, Boston Scientific) and double (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug or Amulet, St. Jude Medical/Abbott) LAAC devices were used. An imaging core laboratory adjudicated the PEs and categorized them as early (≤7 days) and late (8-365 days). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of early and overall PE.

RESULTS

Of 1,023 attempted LAAC procedures, PE was observed in 44 (4.3%) patients; PE was categorized as early in 34 (3.3%) and late in 10 (0.9%) patients. The majority of PEs occurred within 6 hours after LAAC (n = 25, 56.8%) and were clinically relevant (n = 28, 63.6%). Independent predictors of early PE were double-closure left atrial appendage devices (adjusted OR: 8.20; 95% CI: 1.09-61.69), female sex (adjusted OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.50-7.73), the use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) at baseline (adjusted OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.11-6.09), and advanced age (adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.23), whereas female sex and OAC at baseline remained independent predictors of overall PE.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large LAAC registry, PE was observed in less than 1 in 20 patients and usually occurred within 6 hours after procedure. The majority of early PEs were clinically relevant and occurred in the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet procedures. Independent predictors included the use of double-closure devices, female sex, OAC at baseline, and advanced age. (LAAC-registry: Clinical Outcome After Echocardiography-guided LAA-closure; NCT04628078).

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.

Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Stroke despite Oral Anticoagulation

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) experiencing ischemic stroke despite oral anticoagulation (OAC), i.e., breakthrough strokes, are not uncommon, and represent an important clinical subgroup in view of the consistently high risk of stroke recurrence and mortality. The understanding of the heterogenous potential mechanism underlying OAC failure is essential in order to implement specific therapeutic measures aimed at reducing the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke. However, due to the incomplete comprehension of this phenomenon and the limited available data, secondary stroke prevention in such high-risk patients represents a clinical dilemma. There are several available strategies to prevent ischemic stroke recurrence in AF patients with breakthrough stroke in the absence of competing causes unrelated to AF, and these include continuation or change in the type of OAC, addition of antiplatelet therapy, left atrial appendage closure, or any combination of the above options. However, due to the limited available data, the latest guidelines do not provide any specific recommendations about which of the above strategies may be preferred. This review describes the incidence, the clinical impact and the potential mechanisms underlying OAC failure in AF patients. Furthermore, the evidence supporting each of the above therapeutic options for secondary stroke prevention and the potential future directions will be discussed.

CT-Based Preplanning Allows Abstaining from Intraprocedural TEE during Interventional Closure of the LAA in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine whether the application of a CT-based preplanning algorithm might allow abstaining from TEE during LAAC.

BACKGROUND

LAAC is an established treatment alternative for patients with atrial fibrillation. Today, most LAAC procedures are guided by TEE, which, however, leads to the need for patient sedation and might even cause direct harm to the patient. CT-based preplanning of the LAAC procedure, in combination with technical improvements in device design and interventional experience, might allow abstaining from TEE.

METHODS

Fluoro-FLX is a prospective single-center study to evaluate how often TEE leads to a procedural change during interventional LAAC if a dedicated CT planning algorithm is applied. The study hypothesis is that under these circumstances, a sole fluoroscopy-guided LAAC is an alternative to a TEE-guided approach. All procedures are preplanned by cardiac CT and, finally, guided by fluoroscopy only, while TEE is carried out in the background during the intervention for safety reasons.

RESULTS

In none of the 31 consecutive patients did TEE lead to a change in the preplanned fluoroscopy-guided LAAC (success ratio: 1.00; CI: 0.94-1.00), thereby meeting the primary endpoint (performance goal: 0.90). There were no procedure-related adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (no pericardial effusion, TIA, stroke, systemic embolism, device embolism, death).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that it is feasible to perform LAAC under sole fluoroscopic guidance if preplanning is performed using cardiac CT. This might be worth considering, especially in patients who are at high risk for TEE-related adverse events.

Impact of Preprocedural Computed Tomography on Left Atrial Appendage Closure Success: A Swiss-Apero Trial Subanalysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit related to the use of preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CCTA) on top of periprocedural echocardiography to plan percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to evaluate the impact of preprocedural CCTA on LAAC procedural success.

METHODS

In the investigator-initiated SWISS-APERO (Comparison of Amplatzer Amulet and Watchman Device in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure) trial, patients undergoing echocardiography-guided LAAC were randomly assigned to receive the Amulet (Abbott) or Watchman 2.5/FLX (Boston Scientific) device across 8 European centers. According to the study protocol ongoing at the time of the procedure, the first operators had (CCTA unblinded group) or did not have (CCTA blinded group) access to preprocedural CCTA images. In this post hoc analysis, we compared blinded vs unblinded procedures in terms of procedural success defined as complete left atrial appendage occlusion as evaluated at the end of LAAC (short-term) or at the 45-day follow-up (long-term) without procedural-related complications.

RESULTS

Among 219 LAACs preceded by CCTA, 92 (42.1%) and 127 (57.9%) were assigned to the CCTA unblinded and blinded group, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, operator unblinding to preprocedural CCTA remained associated with a higher rate of short-term procedural success (93.5% vs 81.1%; P = 0.009; adjusted OR: 2.76; 95% CI: 1.05-7.29; P = 0.040) and long-term procedural success (83.7% vs 72.4%; P = 0.050; adjusted OR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.03-4.35; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective multicenter cohort of clinically indicated echocardiography-guided LAACs, unblinding of the first operators to preprocedural CCTA images was independently associated with a higher rate of both short- and long-term procedural success. Further studies are needed to better evaluate the impact of preprocedural CCTA on clinical outcomes.

Left atrial appendage occlusion

Prevention of stroke represents a goal of primary importance in health systems due to its associated morbidity and mortality. As several patient groups with increased stroke rates have been identified, multiple approaches have been developed and implemented: oral anticoagulation (OAC) for patients with atrial fibrillation, surgical and percutaneous revascularisation in patients with carotid disease, device closure for patients with patent foramen ovale, and now, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for selected patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The latter group of patients are the focus of this review which evaluates the pathophysiology, selection of patients, procedural performance, outcomes of treatment both during and post-procedure, adjunctive therapy, complications, and longer-term outcomes.

Periprocedural Outcomes Associated With Use of a Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device in China

IMPORTANCE

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative to anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation. However, the performance of LAAO among East Asian patients is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To document the procedural success rate and configurations, major adverse event rates, and antithrombotic medication regimens during and after LAAO procedures among patients in China.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cohort study, consecutive patients from 39 Chinese centers undergoing LAAO were prospectively enrolled between April 1, 2019, and October 31, 2020. Periprocedural and intraprocedural techniques and postprocedural medications were left to the surgeon's discretion. Data were analyzed from July 1 to November 1, 2021.

EXPOSURE

LAAO for patients with atrial fibrillation.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcomes were procedural success and complication rates periprocedure and major adverse event rates of death, stroke, systemic embolism, and bleeding events at 30 days postprocedure; the composite end point of death, stroke, and systemic embolism was also analyzed. Unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the associations of periprocedural techniques (types of anesthesia, intraprocedural imaging modalities, and combined ablation procedure) with 30-day adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 3096 enrolled participants, 1782 participants (57.6%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 69 (9) years. Participants had a high risk of stroke (mean [SD] cardiovascular risk score, 4.0 [1.8]) and a moderate-to-high risk of bleeding (mean [SD] bleeding risk score, 2.4 [1.2]). A total of 1287 procedures (41.6%) were performed under local anesthesia, while 493 procedures (15.9%) used only fluoroscopy guidance. In 1297 procedures (41.9%), LAAO implantation was combined with radiofrequency ablation or cryoablation for atrial fibrillation. Procedural success was achieved in 3032 patients (97.9%). At 30-day follow-up, the rate of the composite end point of death, stroke, or systemic embolism was 0.52% (95% CI, 0.32%-0.84%), and the rate of any life-threatening or major bleeding was 1.23% (95% CI, 0.90%-1.68%). No significant associations were observed between the procedural success or 30-day adverse events and the types of anesthesia (general or local), intraprocedural imaging (transesophageal echocardiography, fluoroscopy, or intracardiac echocardiography), or whether a combined ablation procedure was performed or not. In centers performing at least 40 procedures per year, compared with those performing fewer than 40 procedures per year, procedural success was significantly higher (adjusted odd ratio [aOR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.01-3.53; P = .02) and risk of life-threatening or major bleeding was significantly lower (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.87; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that patients with a high risk of stroke and moderate to high risk of bleeding who underwent implantation of a LAAO device in Chinese centers had high rates of procedural success and low rates of short-term ischemic and bleeding events.

Watchman FLX vs. Watchman 2.5 in a Dual-Center Left Atrial Appendage Closure Cohort: the WATCH-DUAL study

AIMS

No studies have compared Watchman 2.5 (W2.5) with Watchman FLX (FLX) devices to date. We aimed at comparing the FLX with W2.5 devices with respect to clinical outcomes, left atrial appendage (LAA) sealing properties and device-related thrombus (DRT).

METHODS AND RESULTS

All consecutive left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures performed at two European centres between November 2017 and February 2021 were included. Procedure-related complications and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) at 6 months after LAAC were recorded. At 45-day computed tomography (CT) follow-up, intra- (IDL) and peri- (PDL) device leak, residual patent neck area (RPNA), and DRT were assessed by a Corelab. Out of 144 LAAC consecutive procedures, 71 and 73 interventions were performed using W2.5 and FLX devices, respectively. There were no differences in terms of procedure-related complications (4.2% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.626). At 45-day CT, the FLX was associated with lower frequency of IDL [21.3% vs. 40.0%; P = 0.032; odds ratio (OR): 0.375; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.160-0.876; P = 0.024], similar rate of PDL (29.5% vs. 42.0%; P = 0.170), and smaller RPNA [6 (0-36) vs. 40 (6-115) mm2; P = 0.001; OR: 0.240; 95% CI: 0.100-0.577; P = 0.001] compared with the W2.5 group. At 45 days, rate of DRT as detected by CT and/or transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE), was higher with W2.5 (6.0% vs. 0%, P = 0.045). At 6-month follow-up, NACE did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of consecutive LAACs, FLX as compared to W2.5, was associated with similar procedure-related complications and 6-month NACE, but with improved LAA neck coverage, and lower IDL and DRT.

Amulet or Watchman Device for Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Primary Results of the SWISS-APERO Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: No study has so far compared Amulet with the new Watchman FLX in terms of residual left atrial appendage (LAA) patency or clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC). Methods: In the investigator-initiated SWISS APERO trial, patients undergoing LAAC were randomized (1:1) open-label to receive Amulet or Watchman 2.5 or FLX (Watchman) across 8 European centres. The primary endpoint was the composite of justified crossover to a non-randomized device during LAAC procedure or residual LAA patency detected by cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at 45 days. The secondary endpoints included procedural complications, device related thrombus (DRT), peridevice leak (PDL) at transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and clinical outcomes at 45 days. Results: Between June 2018, and May 2021, 221 patients were randomly assigned to Amulet (111 [50.2%]) or Watchman (110 [49.8%]), of whom 25 (22.7%) patients included before October 2019 received Watchman 2.5, and 85 (77.3%) patients received Watchman FLX. The primary endpoint was assessable in 205 (92.8%) patients and occurred in 71 (67.6%) Amulet and 70 (70.0%) Watchman patients respectively (risk ratio [RR] 0.97 [95% CI 0.80- 1.16]; P=0.713). A single justified cross-over occurred in an Amulet patient who fulfilled LAA patency criteria at 45-day CCTA. Major procedure related complications occurred more frequently in the Amulet group (9.0% vs. 2.7%; P=0.047), owing to more frequent bleeding (7.2% vs.1.8%). At 45 days, the PDL rate at TEE was higher with Watchman than Amulet (27.5% vs. 13.7%, p=0.020), albeit none was major (i.e. > 5 mm), whereas DRT was detected in 1 (0.9%) patient with Amulet and 3 (3.0%) patients with Watchman at CCTA and in 2 (2.1%) and 5 (5.5%) patients at TEE, respectively. Clinical outcomes at 45 days did not differ between the groups. Conclusions: Amulet was not associated with lower rate of the composite of crossover or residual LAA patency compared with Watchman at 45-day CCTA. Amulet, was however associated with lower PDL rates at TEE, higher procedural complications and similar clinical outcomes at 45 days compared with Watchman. The clinical relevance of CCTA-detected LAA patency requires further investigation. Clinical Trial Registration: URL https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier NCT03399851.