Combining Watchman left atrial appendage closure and catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: multicentre registry results of feasibility and safety during implant and 30 days follow-up

Risk factors, clinical implications, and management of peridevice leak following left atrial appendage closure: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a treatment modality for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). One of the potential complications of LAAC is a peri-device leak (PDL), which could potentially increase the risk of thromboembolism formation.

METHODS

This systematic review was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Using four databases, all primary studies through April 2022 that met selection criteria were included. Outcomes of interest were studies reporting on PDL characteristics, risk factors and management.

RESULTS

A total of 116 studies met selection criteria (97 original studies and 19 case reports/series). In the original studies (n = 30,133 patients), the weighted mean age was 72.0 ± 7.4 years (57% females) with a HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc weighted means of 2.8 ± 1.1 and 3.8 ± 1.3, respectively. The most common definition of PDL was based on size; 5 mm: major, 3-5 mm: moderate, < 1 mm minor, or trivial. Follow up time for PDL detection was 7.15 ± 9.0 months. 33% had PDL, irrespective of PDL severity/size, and only 0.9% had PDL of greater than 5 mm. The main risk factors for PDL development included lower degree of over-sizing, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, device/LAA shape mismatch, previous radiofrequency ablation, and male sex. The most common methods to screen for PDL included transesophageal echocardiogram and cardiac CT. PDL Management approaches include Amplatzer Patent Foramen Ovale occluder, Hookless ACP, Amplatzer vascular plug II, embolic coils, and detachable vascular coils; removal or replacement of the device; and left atriotomy.

CONCLUSION

Following LAAC, the emergence of a PDL is a significant complication to be aware of. Current evidence suggests possible risk factors that are worth assessing in-depth. Additional research is required to assess suitable candidates, timing, and strategies to managing patients with PDL.

Concurrent percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: State-of-the-art review

Stroke prevention and symptom control are two integral pillars in atrial fibrillation (AF) management. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is effective at reducing stroke risk in high-risk patients with AF who cannot tolerate oral anticoagulant therapy, whilst catheter ablation is effective at reducing AF burden and improving quality-of-life in patients who remain symptomatic despite medical therapy. If both procedures are indicated in an individual patient, they have traditionally been performed on separate occasions, due to long cumulative procedural times, itself associated with thromboembolic risk. Recently, with the advancement of procedural techniques, the concept of concurrent LAAO and AF catheter ablation has gained traction. This review summarises the evidence for and against concurrent LAAO and AF catheter ablation, discussing procedural considerations, including procedural sequencing and post-procedural antithrombotic therapy, safety and efficacy outcomes, and future directions in the field.

Safety and efficacy of ablation for atrial fibrillation in combination with left atrial appendage occlusion in octogenarians

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) combined with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a feasible approach for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Its role in octogenarians with AF is unclear.

HYPOTHESIS

In AF patients over 80 years, CA combined with LAAO is a feasible way in restoring sinus rhythm and preventing stroke.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study. Patients who underwent CA and LAAO in a single procedure between March 2018 and December 2020 were included. Efficacy endpoints included procedural success rate, AF recurrence rate, and thromboembolic events. Safety endpoints included pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade, device-related thrombus (DRT), all-cause death, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

Five hundred and five patients (mean age 69.5 ± 7.7 years; 230 [45.5%] female) were included, with 46 (9.1%) patients aged ≥80 years old (octogenarian group). Prevalence of paroxysmal AF (25 [54.3%] vs. 207 [45.1%], p < 0.001) and CHA2DS2VASc score (4.1 ± 1.3 vs. 3.1 ± 1.4, p < 0.0001) were higher in octogenarian patients. There were six cases (1.2%) of pericardial effusion (all in nonoctogenarian patients). At 3 months postprocedure, 437 patients underwent TEE/CT. Thirty-two (80%) octogenarian patients and 308 (77.6%) nonoctogenarian patients had no peri-device leak. After a mean follow-up of 26.9 ± 9.1 months, AF was documented in 10 (21.7%) patients in octogenarian group and in 103 (22.4%) patients in nonoctogenarian group (p = 0.99). The annual thromboembolic risk was 2.1% and 0.8% in the octogenarian group and nonoctogenarian group, respectively. Death occurred in 16 nonoctogenarian patients. One major bleeding was recorded in the octogenarian group.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of CA and LAAO in a single procedure is a feasible treatment option in octogenarians with comparable efficacy and safety profile.

Safety and Efficacy of Cryoballoon Pulmonary Vein Isolation and Left Atrial Appendage Closure Combined Procedure and Half-Dose Rivaroxaban After Operation in Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Background

To investigate the safety and effectiveness of cryo-balloon pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) combined procedure and half-dose rivaroxaban after operation in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

Patients and Methods

A total of 203 AF patients presented for cryo-balloon PVI, and LAAC combined procedure was included from 2019 to 2021. Postoperative patients were anticoagulated with rivaroxaban with/without clopidogrel for 60 days, with oral rivaroxaban of 10 mg in the elderly group and 20 mg in the non-elderly group. Patients with AF ≥80 and <80 years were considered elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively. Scheduled follow-ups and transesophageal echocardiography were used to assess peri- and post-procedural safety and effectiveness.

Results

A total of 203 patients underwent the combined procedure, 83 in the elderly and 120 in the non-elderly groups. All patients successfully obtained PVI and satisfactory LAAC. During the perioperative period, one patient had puncture complications in the elderly group and one with thrombosis in the non-elderly group. Oral rivaroxaban was administered to 83.2% and 75% of patients in the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively, and rivaroxaban was combined with clopidogrel anticoagulation in the remaining patients. The annual rates of composite clinical events were 8.4% and 9.2% in the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. Patients in both groups had complete sealing, and there was no displacement of devices, death and peripheral arterial thrombosis. Recurrence of AF occurred in 25 and 32 patients in the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. Besides, the two groups had no statistically significant difference in cerebral infarction/transient ischemic attack and device-related thrombosis (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

This study suggests that cryo-balloon PVI and LAAC combined procedure and half-dose rivaroxaban after the operation is safe and effective in treating elderly patients with AF.

A case of combined pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and watchman implant through hepatic vein in a patient with interrupted inferior vena cava (IVC)

This case report describes a successful procedure involving pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and left atrial appendage (LAA) closure with a watchman device in a 78-year-old male with atrial fibrillation and an interrupted inferior vena cava. Due to the vascular anomaly, a transhepatic approach was used, which proved successful.

SCAI/HRS Expert Consensus Statement on Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Closure

Exclusion of the left atrial appendage to reduce thromboembolic risk related to atrial fibrillation was first performed surgically in 1949. Over the past 2 decades, the field of transcatheter endovascular left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has rapidly expanded, with a myriad of devices approved or in clinical development. The number of LAAC procedures performed in the United States and worldwide has increased exponentially since the Food and Drug Administration approval of the WATCHMAN (Boston Scientific) device in 2015. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) has previously published statements in 2015 and 2016 providing societal overview of the technology and institutional and operator requirements for LAAC. Since then, results from several important clinical trials and registries have been published, technical expertise and clinical practice have matured over time, and the device and imaging technologies have evolved. Therefore, SCAI prioritized the development of an updated consensus statement to provide recommendations on contemporary, evidence-based best practices for transcatheter LAAC focusing on endovascular devices.

SCAI/HRS expert consensus statement on transcatheter left atrial appendage closure

Exclusion of the left atrial appendage to reduce thromboembolic risk related to atrial fibrillation was first performed surgically in 1949. Over the past 2 decades, the field of transcatheter endovascular left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has rapidly expanded, with a myriad of devices approved or in clinical development. The number of LAAC procedures performed in the United States and worldwide has increased exponentially since the Food and Drug Administration approval of the WATCHMAN (Boston Scientific) device in 2015. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) has previously published statements in 2015 and 2016 providing societal overview of the technology and institutional and operator requirements for LAAC. Since then, results from several important clinical trials and registries have been published, technical expertise and clinical practice have matured over time, and the device and imaging technologies have evolved. Therefore, SCAI prioritized the development of an updated consensus statement to provide recommendations on contemporary, evidence-based best practices for transcatheter LAAC focusing on endovascular devices.

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.

Comparison of Adverse Events between Isolated Left Atrial Appendage Closure and Combined Catheter Ablation

(1) Background: This study aimed to investigate the effect of an additional catheter ablation (CA) procedure on the risk of post-procedure adverse events during CA combined with left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). (2) Methods: From July 2017 to February 2022, data from 361 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAC at our center were analyzed retrospectively. The adverse events were compared between CA + LAAC and LAAC-only groups. (3) Results: The incidence of device-related thrombus (DRT) and embolic events was significantly lower in the CA + LAAC group than in the LAAC-only group (p = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). A logistic regression analysis revealed that the combined procedure served as a protective factor for DRT (OR = 0.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.89; p = 0.04). Based on a Cox regression analysis, the risk of embolism marginally increased in patients aged ≥65 years (HR = 7.49, 95% CI: 0.85-66.22 p = 0.07), whereas the combined procedure was found to be a protective factor (HR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.07-0.87 p = 0.03). Further subgroup and interaction analyses revealed similar results. (4) Conclusions: The combined procedure may be associated with a lower rate of post-procedure DRT and embolization without a higher occurrence of other adverse events after LAAC. A risk-score-based prediction model was conducted, showing a good prediction performance.

Impact of pre-existing left atrial appendage occluder on catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) and pre-existing left atrial appendage occluder (LAAO) device may need pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). In this pioneer study, we investigated the impact of pre-existing LAAO on AF substrates and outcomes of PVI.

METHODS

From our AF registry, 65 drug-refractory patients with LAAO (72.1±11.4 years old; CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 3.7±2.1) were included for PVI. A balanced control group with 124 patients without LAAO receiving PVI (70.9±10.2 years old, CHA₂DS₂-VASc 3.6±1.9) were included for comparison.

RESULTS

We found PVI is feasible in patients with AF with pre-existing LAAO without new peridevice leak. Two patients with LAAO and one without LAAO had stroke during the procedure (2/65 vs 1/124, p=0.272). Complete isolation of left-sided PVs might not be achieved if the device covered the ridge joining the left atrial (LA) appendage to the body of LA. Local electrogram could be detected over LAAO and there was propagation of conduction over the occluder either under sinus rhythm or under atrial arrhythmia. LAAO might modulate LA substrate and induce peridevice fibrosis, peridevice LA flutter and complex fractionate atrial electrogram. The AF recurrent rate at 1 year was similar between the two groups (9.2% vs 8.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

This pioneer study first showed impacts of LAAO on LA substrate and PVI procedure.

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.

Catheter ablation in combined procedures is associated with residual leaks

Objectives

To compare patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with catheter ablation (CA) and those without CA.

Background

The CA of AF may cause ridge edema, which may affect the safety of LAAC.

Methods

Patients with AF (N = 98) who underwent LAAC (combined CA + LAAC procedure group; N = 51) or alone (LAAC group; N = 47) received pre-procedural, intra-procedural, and 6 week post-procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). The depth and ostial diameter of LAA, device compression, residual leak, and ridge thickness were evaluated in the patients who had undergone combined and alone procedures, as well as images of LAA and primary clinical characteristics.

Results

A residual leak was identified in 27 patients at 6 weeks after implantation by TEE (19 in the combined procedures group and eight in the alone group; p = 0.04). The combined procedure group had a significantly higher rate of a new residual leak than the alone group (25.5 vs. 8.5%; p = 0.03). Meanwhile, compared with at the time of implant, a smaller amount of device compression ratio was significant after 6 weeks (22.44 ± 3.90 vs. 19.59 ± 5.39; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference between both groups in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and TIA/stroke/system embolism.

Conclusion

The combined procedures of CA and LAAC for AF are feasible and safe; however, during the follow-up period, we found that the resolution of ridge edema caused by CA might cause an increased residual leak and a smaller device compression ratio.

Feasibility of concomitant left atrial appendage closure and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation: a randomized pilot study

The optimal approach for prevention of cardiovascular events and reduction of bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and atrial fibrillation (AF) is still controversial. The aim of our study is to asses our single-center experience with concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). 50 patients with ACS without ST elevation and history of AF were randomized after successful PCI to LAAO or conventional medical therapy. The primary endpoints were safety and length of hospitalization. The follow-up period was 30 days. The mean procedural times were 113 ± 23 min PCI + LAAO implantation and 39 ± 19 min of PCI only (p < 0.001), while mean fluoroscopy times were 18 ± 8 min and 12 ± 8 min (p < 0.001), respectively. No procedure-related complications were observed. There was no difference observed for length of hospitalization between two groups. LAAO in patients with ACS and AF undergoing PCI appears safe.

Combined atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion procedure in the United States: a propensity score matched analysis from 2016-2019 national readmission database

AIMS

The safety and feasibility of combining percutaneous catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as a single procedure in the USA have not been investigated. We analyzed the US National Readmission Database (NRD) to investigate the incidence of combined LAAO + CA and compare major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) with matched LAAO-only and CA-only patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this retrospective study from NRD data, we identified patients undergoing combined LAAO and CA procedures on the same day in the USA from 2016 to 2019. A 1:1 propensity score match was performed to identify patients undergoing LAAO-only and CA-only procedures. The number of LAAO + CA procedures increased from 28 (2016) to 119 (2019). LAAO + CA patients (n = 375, mean age 74 ± 9.2 years, 53.4% were males) had non-significant higher MACE (8.1%) when compared with LAAO-only (n = 407, 5.3%) or CA-only patients (n = 406, 7.4%), which was primarily driven by higher rate of pericardial effusion (4.3%). All-cause 30-day readmission rates among LAAO + CA patients (10.7%) were similar when compared with LAAO-only (12.7%) or CA-only (17.5%) patients. The most frequent primary reason for readmissions among LAAO + CA and LAAO-only cohorts was heart failure (24.6 and 31.5%, respectively), while among the CA-only cohort, it was paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (25.7%).

CONCLUSION

We report an 63% annual growth (from 28 procedures) in combined LAAO and CA procedures in the USA. There were no significant difference in MACE and all-cause 30-day readmission rates among LAAO + CA patients compared with matched LAAO-only or CA-only patients.

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.

Hospital outcomes of patients receiving catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation, left atrial appendage closure, or both

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) require transseptal access; combining both in a single procedure may have advantages. However, the safety of this approach has not been extensively studied. The objective of this study was to compare in hospital outcomes among patients receiving CA, LAAC, and combination of both treatments on the same day.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of the National Inpatient Sample database. The primary outcome was the presence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) during index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included stroke, pericardial effusion, pericardiocentesis, and bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 69,285 hospitalizations with AF were included in the analysis, of which 71.7% received LAAC, 27.8% received CA, and 0.5% received combination of both treatments on the same day. MACEE (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.39-6.70), stroke (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 0.55-16.01), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.07-1.41), pericardiocentesis (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.25-3.86), and bleeding (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 0.87-12.07) did not differ significantly between CA and combination treatment. Similarly, MACCE (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.28-4.41), stroke (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.24-4.35), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.11-1.90), pericardiocentesis (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.14-2.83), and bleeding (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 0.65-6.39) did not differ significantly between LAAC and combination treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined approach is infrequently used in clinical practice (< 1%). However, major life-threatening adverse events did not differ between CA and LAAC when performed in isolation or combined in a single procedural stage on the same day.

Experience of Combined Procedure during Percutaneous LAA Closure

Introduction: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and contraindication to long-term OAC. Combined strategy with percutaneous LAAC at the same time of other cardiac structural or electrophysiological procedures has emerged as an alternative to a staged strategy. Aim: To describe our experience with combined LAAC procedures using Watchman™ devices. Methods: All patients with combined LAAC procedures using Watchman™ (WN) devices performed from 2016 to 2021 were included. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of periprocedural complications and adverse events during the follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint included strokes, systemic embolisms, major bleeding and cardiovascular death. Results: From 2016, among 160 patients who underwent LAAC using WN devices, 19 underwent a combined strategy: 7 transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TEMVR) (37%), 6 typical atrial flutter ablation (31%), 2 leadless pacemaker (LP) implantation (10%) and 4 AF ablation (22%). The WN device was successfully implanted in 98% and 100% of cases for single and combined LAAC procedures, respectively (p = 0.63). Median follow-up was 13 months (IQR 25/75 3/24). Device-related complications occurred in 6 out of 141 patients (4%) who underwent single LAAC and in no (0/19) patient in the combined LAAC procedure (p = ns). The procedural-related complications did not differ significantly between groups (5% vs. 10%, respectively, in the single and combined group, p = 0.1). Conclusion: Combined procedure using the Watchman™ devices and one other structural or electrophysiological procedure appears safe and effective. Larger series are needed to confirm these results.

Effect of catheter ablation combined with left appendage occlusion for non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

Objective

To estimate the effect of catheter ablation combined with left appendage occlusion in the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) by a method of meta-analysis.

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for the studies about catheter ablation combined with left appendage occlusion in treating NVAF. The data analysis was performed using R 4.0.5 software. The retrieval time was from inception to May 12, 2021.

Results

A total of 18 published studies were identified in the meta-analysis, including 1385 participants. During the perioperative period of catheter ablation combined with left appendage occlusion in treating NVAF, the pooled incidences of pericardial effusion, major or minor bleeding events, and residual flow documented were 0.5%(95%CI 0.0002–0.0099), 1.42%(95% CI 0.00–0.04), 7.24%(95% CI 0.0447–0.0975), respectively. During the follow-up, the incidences of all-cause mortality, embolism events, and bleeding events were 0.32%(95%CI 0.0000–0.0071), 1.29%(95%CI 0.0037–0.0222), 2.07%(95% CI 0.0075–0.0339), respectively. In the follow-up period of the transesophageal echocardiography, the most complication was residual flow event with an incident rate of 10.80%(95% CI 0.054–0.1620). The maximum occurrence probability of residual flow events was 17.92% (95% CI 0.1133–0.2452). Moreover, the incident rate of NVAF recurrence was 29.23% (95% CI 0.2222–0.3623).

Conclusion

The meta-analysis suggests that the “one-stop” procedure is effective for those patients undergoing NVAF. However, Patients with more residual blood flow have a higher incidence of bleeding complications. More studies are warranted to verify the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation combined with left appendage occlusion in terms of the “one-stop” procedure.

Impact of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Combined with Catheter Ablation on Endocrine and Mechanical Cardiac Function in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Background

The combined procedure of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and catheter ablation (CA) is a safe and feasible therapy to treat patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the effect of the combined procedure on cardiac function remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the changes in endocrine and mechanical function of the heart following the combined procedure.

Methods

This retrospective study included 62 consecutive patients who underwent the combined procedure of AF ablation and WATCHMAN LAAC and 62 sex and age-matched patients who only received AF ablation. During follow-up, patients were examined for brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels to represent endocrine cardiac function. Mechanical cardiac function was assessed during echocardiographic examination by means of the LA ejection fraction, LA strain (Ƹ), and LA strain rate (SR).

Results

(1) The BNP levels decreased acutely after the procedure, rose at day 3 postoperation, but trended downwards at 3 months postoperation in both groups. No significant difference was observed between the two groups. (2) LA ejection fraction, LA Ƹ, and SR exhibited a continuous upward trend over a 3-month follow-up in both groups. There was no significant difference in LA ejection fractions, SRe (the parameter of LA conduit function), and SRa (the parameter of LA booster pump function) between the two groups. However, the Ƹ and SRs (the parameters of LA reservoir function) improved in patients treated with CA alone.

Conclusions

The combined procedure of LAAC and CA significantly improved the endocrine and mechanical function of the heart. Compared to simple CA, based on CA with LAAC intervention, it does not significantly change LA endocrine function but may lead to a decline in the LA reservoir function.

Current evidence on the safety and efficacy of combined atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Combined atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and left atrial (LA) appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) has been practiced for management of both the symptoms and the high stroke risk of AF. The purpose of this review is to review recent evidence regarding the combined procedure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newly acquired long-term data of combined AF ablation and LAAC supplied satisfactory evidence on the safety and efficacy of the combined procedure. Studies also showed LA structural remodeling following combined procedure was mainly affected by sinus rhythm status post catheter ablation, not by LAAC. A cost-effectiveness study revealed that combined procedure was a cost-effective therapeutic option in symptomatic AF patients with high stroke and bleeding risk. Due to recent evidence of high incidences of LAA thrombus formation after LAA electrical isolation (LAAEI) and benefit of LAAC after LAAEI, an extended combined procedure of standard AF ablation plus LAAEI and LAAC was considered as a potential therapeutic option for persistent AF patients with high stroke risk.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, combined AF ablation and LAAC serve as a promising option for patients with symptomatic AF and high risk of stroke and/or bleeding.

Minimally invasive thoracoscopic left atrial appendage occlusion compared with transcatheter left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in recurrent nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients after radiofrequency ablation: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Tanscatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) closure and minimally invasive thoracoscopic LAA occlusion are local interventions of LAA for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, the safety and efficacy of these methods have not been compared. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of those two treatment approaches for stroke prevention in NVAF patients.

METHODS

Two hundred and nine recurrent NVAF patients who received radiofrequency ablation were enrolled. These patients were treated with transcatheter LAA closure or thoracoscopic LAA occlusion. The patients were followed up from the first postoperative day and evaluated for efficacy endpoints (stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), systemic embolism (SE), and death) and a safety endpoint (bleeding events). Perioperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 1.8 years (383 patient-years), the overall rate of the composite efficacy endpoints was similar between the two groups (3.8 vs. 2.7 events per 100 patient-years; HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.225-2.237; P = 0.559). However, regarding primary safety endpoint, there were 1.5 bleeding events per 100 patient-years in the thoracoscopic LAA occlusion group, compared with 6.4 in transcatheter LAA closure group (HR = 0.246; 95% CI: 0.074-0.819; P = 0.022). The incidence of operative complications was 3/138 (2.17%) in thoracoscopic LAA occlusion group and 1/71 (1.41%) in transcatheter LAA closure group.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracoscopic LAA occlusion and transcatheter LAA closure have similar efficacy in preventing stroke in NVAF patients. However, the thoracoscopic group had fewer bleeding events than the transcatheter group, but the former group required a longer hospital stay.

The long-term efficacy and safety of combining ablation and left atrial appendage closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Combined ablation and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative for atrial fibrillation patients with a high risk of stroke. However, the long-term outcomes of this combined procedure remain elusive.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched from the establishment of databases to 1 January 2021. Studies on the long-term (defined as a mean follow-up of approximately 12 months or longer) efficacy and safety outcomes of combined ablation and LAAC were included.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies comprising 1428 patients were enrolled. The pooled long-term freedom rate from atrial arrhythmia was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.71), long-term successful rate sealing of LAAC was 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00-1.00), and ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism during follow-up was 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.02). Meanwhile, of the periprocedural adverse events, phrenic nerve palsy, intracoronary air embolus, device embolization, and periprocedural death had a rate of 0.00 (95% CI: 0.00-0.00), procedure-related bleeding events of 0.03 (95% CI: 0.02-0.04), and pericardial effusion requiring or not requiring intervention of 0.00 (95% CI: 0.00-0.01). Moreover, for the long-term adverse events, device dislocation, intracranial bleeding, pericardial effusion requiring or not requiring intervention, and all-cause mortality had a rate of 0.00 (95% CI: 0.00-0.00), device embolization of 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.01), and other bleeding events of 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.03).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that the combined atrial ablation and LAAC is an effective and safe strategy with long-term benefits.

Pericardial Effusion During the Perioperative Period for Left Atrial Appendage Closure

Objectives: To analyze the predictors of pericardial effusion (PE) during the perioperative period of the left atrial appendage closure procedure in our center. Methods: A total of 624 consecutive patients with non-valvular AF undergoing LAAC from May 2014 to October 2019 were involved in this study. Patients were divided into groups depending on whether they showed no PE, intraoperative PE or postoperative PE. We analyzed the predictors of PE during the perioperative period of the LAAC procedure. Results: (1) Of the 624 patients in our population (age 68.2 ± 9.1 years, 63% male, CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.4 ± 1.6), 30 patients experienced PE in the perioperative period, including 10 intraoperative PE and 20 postoperative PE. (2) A total of 26 (86.6%) patients had mild PE. 4 (13.4%) patients had pericardial tamponade, 2 (6.7%) of which were intraoperative, and the other 2 (6.7%) postoperative. (3) Significant differences were measured in relation to female sex, intraoperative time, combined procedures, changes in sinus rhythm, device retrieval times and duration of hospitalization between 2 groups (no PE occurred, intraoperative PE), P values were 0.039, 0.024, 0.004, 0.015, 0.003 and 0.039. Conclusions: Female sex, paroxysmal AF, changing in sinus rhythm, device retrieval times and intraoperative time all had a positive association with PE during the perioperative period.

The prevalence and characteristics of candidates for percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion using a WATCHMAN device among patients who underwent atrial fibrillation ablation in a Japanese population

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) using a WATCHMAN device could be a treatment option for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) with thromboembolic and bleeding risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and characteristics of patients with AF ablation who are potential candidates for WATCHMAN implantation in a Japanese population.

METHODS

We enrolled 2443 consecutive patients who had previously undergone AF ablation and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). We assessed their clinical characteristics and measured their LAA orifice diameter and depth retrospectively using the obtained TEE images. We defined patients who met both anatomical criteria (LAA orifice max diameter: 17-31 mm and LAA max depth > LAA orifice max diameter) and clinical criteria (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥ 2 and HAS-BLED score ≥ 3) as LAAO candidates.

RESULTS

Among the 2443 enrolled patients, 361 (15%) met the clinical criteria, and 1928 (79%) met the anatomical criteria. Thus 12% (293/2443) of the total patient group met the criteria of LAAO candidates. LAAO candidates showed larger left atrial (LA) volume (77.6 ± 30.1 vs. 67.7 ± 29.1 mL, P < 0.001), larger LAA orifice diameter (22.5 ± 3.2 vs. 22.0 ± 4.3 mm, P = 0.026), and larger LAA depth (28.9 ± 4.6 vs. 27.0 ± 4.8 mm, P < 0.001). LAAO candidates made up only 23% of patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥ 2 (N = 1295), whereas 78% of patients with a HAS-BLED score ≥ 3 (N = 378) were LAAO candidates.

CONCLUSION

Twelve percent of patients who underwent AF ablation were potential candidates for LAAO using a WATCHMAN device in this Japanese population. It is imperative to evaluate bleeding risk when considering the indications for LAAO.

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

AIMS

Clinical practice guidelines do not recommend discontinuation of long-term oral anticoagulation in patients with a high stroke risk after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with Watchman has emerged as an alternative to long-term anticoagulation for patients accepting of the procedural risks. We report on the long-term outcomes of combining catheter ablation procedures for AF and LAAC from multicentre registries.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were pooled from two prospective, real-world Watchman LAAC registries running in parallel in Europe/Middle-East/Russia (EWOLUTION) and Asia/Australia (WASP) between 2013 and 2015. Of the 1140 patients, 142 subjects at 11 centres underwent a concomitant AF ablation and LAAC procedure. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.4 ± 1.4 and HAS-BLED score 1.5 ± 0.9. Successful LAAC was achieved in 99.3% of patients. The 30-day device and/or procedure-related serious adverse event rate was 2.1%. After a mean follow-up time of 726 ± 91 days, 92% of patients remained off oral anticoagulation. The rates of the composite endpoint of ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack/systemic thromboembolism were 1.09 per 100 patient-years (100-PY); and for non-procedural major bleeding were 1.09 per 100-PY. These represent relative reductions of 84% and 70% vs. expected rates per risk scores.

CONCLUSION

The long-term outcomes from these international, multicentre registries show efficacy for all-cause stroke prevention and a significant reduction in late bleeding events in a population of high stroke risk post-ablation patients who have been withdrawn from oral anticoagulation.

Feasibility and safety of left atrial appendage occlusion guided by procedural fluoroscopy only: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is usually performed via the guidance of procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) companied by general anesthesia (GA).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility and safety of LAAO guided by procedural fluoroscopy only.

METHODS

The patients eligible for LAAO were enrolled into the current study and received implantation of either Watchman device or LAmbre device. The procedure was carried out with procedural fluoroscopy only and no companied GA; the position, shape, and leakage of the device were assessed by contrast angiography. TEE was performed after 3-month follow-up to evaluate the thrombosis, and leakage of device.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with either Watchman device (n = 49) or LAmbre device (n = 48) were consecutively enrolled. Watchman device group was of lower CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc and HAS-BLED scores compared with LAmbre device groups (p < .05); the two groups had similar distributions of other baseline characteristics (p > .05), including procedural success rate (98.0% vs. 97.9%), mean procedure time, mean fluoroscopy time, total radiation dose, contrast medium dose, percentage of peri-device leakage. Pericardial effusions requiring intervention occurred in two of the Watchman group. TEE follow-up found no patient with residual leakage ≥5 mm at 3 months and no device related thrombosis (DRT). During the 22.0 ± 11.1 months follow-up, two patients experienced ischemic stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

LAAO with the procedural imaging of fluoroscopy only exhibited the promising results of efficacy and safety. A prospective randomized multicenter study would be required to verify the observations in this study.

Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure: Single versus combined procedures

OBJECTIVES

This study compares procedural and late clinical outcomes of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with Amplatzer devices as a single versus a combined procedure with other structural or coronary interventions.

BACKGROUND

Multiple cardiac conditions are frequent among elderly patients and invite simultaneous treatment to ensure a favorable patient outcomes.

METHODS

559 consecutive patients (73.3 ± 11.1 years) underwent LAAC with Amplatzer devices at two centres (Bern and Zurich university hospitals, Switzerland) either as a single procedure or combined with other interventions. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of major peri-procedural complications and major bleeding at follow-up, the primary efficacy endpoint included stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular/unexplained death. All event rates are reported per 100 patient-years.

RESULTS

In 263 single and 296 combined procedures with percutaneous coronary interventions (47.6%), closure of an atrial septal defect (8.4%) or a patent foramen ovale (36.5%), transcatheter aortic valve implantation (10.1%), mitral clipping (4.1%), atrial fibrillation ablation (8.8%), or another procedure (3.0%) were analyzed. Device success (96.6% [single] vs. 99.0% [combined], p = .08) did not differ between the groups. After a mean follow-up of 2.6 ± 1.5 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5 years and a total of 1,422 patient-years, the primary efficacy (40/677, 5.9% [single] vs. 37/745, 5.0% [combined]; HR, 1.2, 95% CI, 0.8-1.9, p = .44), as well as the primary safety endpoint (25/677, 3.7% vs 28/745, 3.8%; HR, 1.0, 95% CI, 0.6-1.8, p = .89) were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

LAAC with Amplatzer devices combined with structural, coronary, and electrophysiological procedures offers procedural feasibility and safety, as well as long-term efficacy.

WD, Serpa R. Initial Experience and Results of Combined Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation: Catheter Ablation with High-Power Short Duration Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Closure

Introduction: Long-term freedom from atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation and, consequently, the potential for stroke reduction remain unpredictable. Recently, left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) became an effective mechanical alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in AF patients. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combined treatment for AF with catheter ablation (CA) with the high-power short duration technique associated with LAAC in one single procedure. Methods: Patients with non-valvular AF who underwent combined CA and LAAC procedure were included in the retrospective observational study. Between April 2018 and October 2020, 13 patients with AF were included, eight (61,54%) males, eight (61.54%) with persistent AF (PersAF), mean age 68.54 (65–84) years old, mean time from AF diagnosis to treatment 13.08 (3–33) months, mean CHA2VASC2 5.08 (3–7), all patients with coronary or vascular disease, 12 (92.31%) with hypertension, five (38.46%) with left ventricular dysfunction, four (30.77%) prior strokes using OAC and four (30.77%) patients with diabetes. Indications for LAAC included history of contraindication to OAC because of severe bleeding in eight (61.54%), previous stroke in four (30.77%) and two (13.08%) patients with LAA thrombus, despite the use of two different OAC (one associated with bleeding). One patient had a pseudoaneurysm in femoral artery, and two patients died of non-procedure complications after 30 days. At six months, angiotomography showed successful complete sealing of the LAA in seven (77.72%) of nine patients evaluated, and the two patients without it had a leak of less than 2 mm. After mean follow-up of 14 months (five to 33), 10 (90.91%) of the 11 patients were in sinus rhythm. Three (27.27%) patients, one in blanking period, recovered sinus rhythm after amiodarone. No cardioembolic or bleeding events occurred. Conclusion: In this small observational study, we showed the feasibility and safety of the combined therapy with AF catheter ablation with LAAC with a high rate of sinus rhythm and no cardioembolic event.

One-stop strategy for treatment of atrial fibrillation: feasibility and safety of combining catheter ablation and left atrial appendage closure in a single procedure

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation is effective in restoring sinus rhythm and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is increasingly used for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to observe the feasibility and safety of performing AF ablation and LAAC in a single (one-stop) procedure.

METHODS

Consecutive AF patients who underwent the combined procedure of AF ablation and LAAC with WATCHMAN device between March 2017 and September 2018 were prospectively enrolled. Baseline and intra-procedural parameters were evaluated. Three-month and subsequent 1-year follow-up were performed in all and earlier-enrolled subjects, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 178 AF patients (94 males, 68.9 ± 8.1 years) underwent the one-stop procedure with CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.3 ± 1.5 and HAS-BLED score 1.6 ± 1.0, respectively. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in all patients while additional linear ablation was applied if the operator deemed necessary, yielding immediate ablation success rate of 98.9% (176/178). In the subsequent LAAC, satisfactory seal (residual leak <5 mm) was achieved in all patients. One stroke and four cardiac perforations occurred peri-operatively. At 3-month follow-up, sinus rhythm and satisfactory seal were maintained in 153/178 (86.0%) and 178/178 (100%) patients, respectively. One stroke and one delayed cardiac tamponade occurred, while no device-related thrombus or device migration was observed. During the 1-year follow-up for the earlier enrolled subjects, 52/72 (72.2%) of the patients maintained sinus rhythm. There was no stroke or systemic embolism observed.

CONCLUSION

Combining catheter ablation and LAAC in a single procedure can be successfully and safely performed in non-valvular AF patients of Chinese population.

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.

Two-Year Outcome From Combining Cryoballoon Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Closure: CLACBAC Study

Objective: Catheter ablation combined with left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has emerged as a promising strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at high risk for stroke or with contraindications for oral anticoagulants (OACs). But the evidence for the long-term safety and efficacy of a combined procedure using cryoballoon ablation (CBA) with LAAC is still insufficient.

Methods: From October 2015 to December 2017, a total of 76 consecutive non-valvular, drug-refractory AF patients who underwent a combined procedure of CBA and LAAC are included. Peri- and post-procedural safety and efficacy were evaluated through scheduled follow-ups and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE).

Results: A total of 74 patients (97.4%) underwent the combined procedure and achieved instant pulmonary vein isolation and satisfactory LAAC. With a mean follow-up time of 23.7 ± 11.0 months, the recurrence of atrial arrhythmia was recorded in 35 patients (48.0%). In addition, a survival analysis shows a non-significant higher recurrence in persistent AF (p = 0.48). The overall OAC withdrawal rate was 97.2%, and one patient (1.4%) had a lethal hemorrhagic stroke while on single antiplatelet therapy. For safety concerns, the overall mortality was 2.7%, which resulted from one case of myocardial infarction on OAC and one hemorrhagic stroke, as mentioned. No other major hemorrhagic events occurred. Among the 72 patients (94.7%) who underwent TEE, one patient (1.4%) had device-related thrombosis and one patient (1.4%) had prominent residual flow (over 3 mm). Both were prescribed long-term OACs without severe complications occurring.

Conclusions: Combining CBA with LAAC in a single procedure achieved considerable long-term safety and efficacy, providing a promising strategy for AF management.

Cost-effectiveness of combined catheter ablation and left atrial appendage closure for symptomatic atrial fibrillation in patients with high stroke and bleeding risk

BACKGROUND

Combined catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) have been proposed for management of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with high stroke and bleeding risk. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of combined CA and LAAC compared with CA and standard oral anticoagulation (OAC) in symptomatic AF.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to assess total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio among 2 post-CA strategies: (1) standard OAC and (2) LAAC (combined CA and LAAC procedure). The base-case used a 10-year time horizon and consisted of a hypothetical cohort of patients aged 65 years with symptomatic AF, with high thrombotic (CHA₂DS₂-VASc = 3) and bleeding risk (HAS-BLED = 3), and planned for AF ablation. Values for transition probabilities, utilities, and costs were derived from the literature. Costs were converted to 2020 US dollars. Half-cycle correction was applied, and costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Sensitivity analyses were performed for significant variables and scenario analyses for higher embolic risk.

RESULTS

In the base-case cohort of 10,000 patients followed for 10 years, total costs for the LAAC strategy were $29,027 and for OAC strategy were $27,896. The LAAC strategy was associated with 122 fewer disabling strokes and 203 fewer intracranial hemorrhages per 10,000 patients compared with the OAC strategy. The LAAC strategy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $11,072/QALY. In sensitivity analyses, although cost-effectiveness was highly dependent on the risk of intracranial hemorrhage in the LAAC strategy and the cost of the combined procedure, LAAC was superior to OAC under the most circumstances. Scenario analyses demonstrated that the combined procedure was more cost-effective in patients with higher stroke risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In symptomatic AF patients with high stroke and bleeding risk who are planned for CA, the combined CA and LAAC procedure may be a cost-effective therapeutic option and be more beneficial to patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc risk score ≥3.

Cryoballoon Ablation and Bipolar Voltage Mapping in Patients With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Devices

Left atrial appendage occlusion is utilized as a second line therapy to long-term oral anticoagulation in appropriately selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We examined the feasibility of cryoballoon (CB) pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) subsequent to Watchman device implantation. The study prospectively identified patients with Watchman devices (>90 days old) who underwent CB-PVI ablation between 2018 and 2019. Twelve consecutive patients (male 50%; mean age 71 ± 9 years; CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 3.4 ± 1.1) underwent CB-PVI procedures after Watchman device implantation (mean 182 ± 82 days). Acute PVI was achieved in 100% of patients. All patients had evidence of complete (n = 9) or partial (n = 3) endothelialization of the surface of the Watchman device with conductive tissue properties demonstrated during electrophysiologic testing. There were no major procedure-related complications including death, stroke, pericardial effusion, device dislodgment, device thrombus, or new or increasing peri-device leak. Mean peri-device leak size (45-day postimplant: 0.06 ± 0.09 mm vs Post-PVI: 0.04 ± 0.06 mm; p = 0.61) remained unchanged. Two patients had recurrence of AF after the 90-day blanking period (13.2 ± 6.6 months). One patient underwent a redo ablation procedure for recurrent AF. This pilot study suggests the potential feasibility of CB-PVI ablation in patients with chronic Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion devices. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy and safety of this approach.

Acute left atrial ridge lesion after cryoballoon ablation: How does this affect left atrial appendage closure combined procedure?

BACKGROUND

Acute left atrial ridge (LAR) lesions have been observed following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, LAR lesions had not yet been quantitatively evaluated and their influence on procedure combining cryoballoon (CB) ablation with left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) remained to be explored.

METHODS

The profile of LAR lesions was measured by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in 117 consecutive nonvalvular AF patients, who underwent the combined procedure of CB ablation and LAAC. We thoroughly investigated how LAR lesions correlated with baseline variables and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 95 out of 96 available TEE images presented prominent acute LAR lesions. In terms of dimensions, there was a greater change in width (Δwidth = 3.6 ± 2.3 mm) than the thickness (Δthickness = 2.6 ± 3.5 mm), and the outer ostium was narrowed (Δouter ostium diameter = -3.4 ± 4.0 mm), while the inner ostium remained unchanged. A higher nadir temperature when freezing the left superior pulmonary vein (LSPV) led to an LAR lesion with a two times greater width (adjusted odds ratio = 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.31). In the evaluation of LAAC outcomes, four patients implanted with Watchman devices had minimal residual flow at the inferior border, while two implanted with LAmbre devices developed residual flow at the LAR side. Clinical outcomes were similar between groups divided by lesion size.

CONCLUSION

Acute LAR lesions frequently occurred following the CB ablation combined procedure, and lesion width positively correlates with LSPV nadir temperature. The presence of these lesions affects the measurement of pacifier devices but has little impact on that of occluder devices.

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.

Cryoablation Combined with Left Atrial Appendage Closure: A Safe and Effective Procedure for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Patients

Background

Catheter ablation combined with left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) was reported as a feasible strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with high risk of stroke or contraindications of oral anticoagulants. We aimed to observe the short-term safety and efficacy of combining cryoballoon ablation (CBA) with LAAC in paroxysmal (PAF) patients. Method and Results. From Jan 2016 to Dec 2017, 304 patients diagnosed with nonvalvular, drug-refractory PAF were included, who underwent either CBA alone (n = 262) or combined procedure (n = 42). Instant pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with CBA was achieved in all patients, while successful LAAC achieved in 41 (97.6%) of combined procedure patients. 1-year freedom of AF rate was lower in combined procedure group (84.7% vs 70.7%, p = 0.04), with unadjusted hazard ratio (HR = 1.97) and 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–3.77. However, the multivariate COX model revealed left atrial diameter (p = 0.002, HR = 1.10, and 95% CI 1.04, 1.17), rather than procedure type (p = 0.51, HR = 1.34, and 95% CI 0.57, 3.17), was the predictor for freedom of AF. Only 2 patients in the CBA group had stroke, contributing to the nonsignificant higher stroke incidence (p = 1.00). Transoesophageal echochardiography (TEE) achieved in 35 patients (83.3%) showed complete occlusion with no obvious residual flow (>3 mm), Device-related thrombosis, or pericardial perfusion. All-cause mortality, rehospitalization, and complication rates were similar.

Conclusion

Combining CBA with LAAC in a single procedure is a feasible strategy for PAF patients, with comparable short-term safety and efficacy to CBA alone.

Left Atrial Appendage Mechanical Exclusion: Procedural Planning Using Cardiovascular Computed Tomographic Angiography

Left atrial appendage (LAA) mechanical exclusion is being investigated for nonpharmacologic stroke risk reduction in selected patients with atrial fibrillation. There are multiple potential approaches in various stages of development and clinical application, each of which depends on specific cardiothoracic anatomic characteristics for optimal performance. Multiple imaging modalities can be utilized for application of this technology, with transesophageal echocardiography used for intraprocedural guidance. Cardiovascular computed tomographic angiography can act as a virtual patient avatar, allowing for the assessment of cardiac structures in the context of surrounding cardiac, coronary vascular, thoracic vascular, and visceral and skeletal anatomy, aiding preprocedural decision-making, planning, and follow-up. Although transesophageal echocardiography is used for intraprocedural guidance, computed tomographic angiography may be a useful adjunct for preprocedure assessment of LAA sizing and anatomic obstacles or contraindications to deployment, aiding in the assessment of optimal approaches. Potential approaches to LAA exclusion include endovascular occlusion, epicardial ligation, primary minimally invasive intercostal thoracotomy with thoracoscopic LAA ligation or appendectomy, and minimally invasive or open closure as part of cardiothoracic surgery for other indications. The goals of these procedures are complete isolation or exclusion of the entire appendage without leaving a residual appendage stump or residual flow with avoidance of acute or chronic damage to surrounding cardiovascular structures. The cardiovascular imager plays an important role in the preprocedural and postprocedural assessment of the patient undergoing LAA exclusion.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Patients with Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement, MitraClip, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, and Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Optimizing Long-Term Patient Outcomes

Interventional cardiologists and electrophysiologists perform various procedures to improve the quality and longevity of life. The mitigation of stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation may be ignored when considering other more acute or urgent situations, such as severe coronary or valvular heart disease requiring treatment or symptomatic atrial fibrillation necessitating ablation. However, we must keep this long-term stroke risk in mind to optimize patients' overall outcomes. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion is an important option in those who present with high stroke and bleeding risk. Ongoing studies will help provide objective data in this arena.

[Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation : Present evidence, ongoing studies, open questions]

About every fifth ischemic stroke is caused by atrial fibrillation. Oral anticoagulation is highly effective in secondary stroke prevention, but a relevant portion of patients with atrial fibrillation is not (permanently) anticoagulated for a variety of reasons. Based on present evidence, no general recommendation can be given for left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. However, left atrial appendage occlusion is a treatment option after severe anticoagulation-related bleeding, if the cause of bleeding is not treatable. Left atrial appendage occlusion is critical in patients with a relative contraindication for oral anticoagulation or lack of adherence to given medication. It seems to be important that further randomized studies confirm a benefit of left atrial appendage occlusion in selected patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In addition, it is vital to clarify whether discontinuation of antiplatelets is feasible after catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion, as antiplatelets are associated with a risk of bleeding. Within this review article, we discuss present evidence, gaps of knowledge and provide an overview on ongoing clinical studies. In addition, we summarize the design of the CLOSURE-AF study. This randomized multicenter study will start recruitment soon and is funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research e. V.

Left atrial appendage closure after cryoballoon ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is effective for patients with drug-refractory symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). For patients with a high risk of stroke (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥2), life-long oral anticoagulation therapy should be continued even after successful catheter ablation. We investigated the safety and efficacy of concomitant use of a second-generation CBA catheter for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and a left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) device in patients with AF.

METHODS

We enrolled 27 patients (64.7 ± 6.3 years, 74% male, 63% paroxysmal AF, 37% persistent AF, 4.8 ± 1.4 CHA₂DS₂-VASc score, and 3.6 ± 1.3 HAS-BLED score). In total, 85% of the patients had a prior stroke or TIA, and 30% of patients had a clinical history of bleeding. Patients received a CBA for PVI and underwent occlusion of the LAA with an LAAC device. The efficacy of CBA was defined as lack of arrhythmia recurrence (AF, atrial flutter, and/or atrial tachycardia lasting ≥30 s) after a 90-day blanking period. The success of LAAC was determined by the rate of stroke, TIA, and/or bleeding events.

RESULTS

The mean procedural time for CBA and LAAC was 80 ± 16 min and 44 ± 12 min, respectively. Acute PVI by CBA was achieved in 100% of the procedures, and 96% of patients obtained acute LAAC device placement during the procedure. Upon complete release of the LAAC device, only 62% patients (16/26) had no detectable leakage during intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiography. Three patients experienced an acute complication: a pericardial effusion and two phrenic nerve palsy events. Mean follow-up was 18 months (range 9-23 months), and freedom from AF recurrence was 74% (20/27).

CONCLUSION

The intraprocedural combination of CBA and LAAC is feasible in patients with non-valvular AF with a high risk of stroke, TIA, and/or bleeding. Larger long-term randomized studies are needed to judge the overall safety and efficacy of the combined procedure.

Efficacy and safety of catheter ablation combined with left atrial appendage occlusion for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is currently the most prevalent arrhythmia in clinical practice, with stroke being one of its major complications. Combining catheter ablation and percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) into a "one-stop" intervention could reduce stroke incidence in selected high-risk patients and, at the same time, relieve AF symptoms in a single procedure. This meta-analysis analyzed the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation combined with LAAO for nonvalvular AF. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2019 to identify relevant citations. Efficacy indexes were procedural success, AF recurrence, stroke/transient ischemic attacks (TIA), and device-related thrombus (DRT). Safety indexes were all-cause death, major hemorrhagic complications, and pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade. The incidence rate of events (ratio of events to patients) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated as summary results. A forest plot was constructed to present pooled rates. Eighteen studies (two randomized controlled trials and 16 observational studies) were included. The results showed that one-stop intervention has significant efficacy and safety, with procedural success of .98 (95% CI, .97-1.00), AF recurrence of .24 (95% CI, .15-.35), stroke/TIA of .01 (95% CI, .00-.01), DRT of .00 (95% CI, .00-.01), all-cause mortality of .00 (95% CI, .00-.00), cardiac/neurological mortality of .00 (95% CI, .00-.00), major hemorrhagic complications of .01 (95% CI, .00-.02), and pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade of .01 (95% CI, .00-.01). A single procedure with catheter ablation and LAAO in AF is a feasible strategy with significant efficacy and safety.

Residual flow may increase the risk of adverse events in patients received combined catheter ablation and transcatheter left atrial appendage closure for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

Background

Catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) have been combined into a novel one-stop procedure for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, postoperative complications are relatively common in patients undergoing LAAC; the complications, including residual flow, increase in the risk of bleeding, or other adverse events, are unknown in patients receiving one-stop therapy. Therefore, we tried to evaluate the adverse events of CA and LAAC hybrid therapy in patients with nonvalvular AF.

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis and computer-based literature search to identify publications listed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases. Studies were included if patients received CA and LAAC hybrid therapy and reported adverse events.

Results

Overall 13 studies involving 952 patients were eligible based on the inclusion criteria. In the periprocedural period, the pooled incidence of pericardial effusion was 3.15%. The rates of bleeding events and residual flow were 5.02 and 9.11%, respectively. During follow-up, the rates of all-cause mortality, embolism events, bleeding events, AF recurrence, and residual flow were 2.15, 5.24, 6.95, 32.89, and 15.35%, respectively. The maximum occurrence probability of residual flow events was 21.87%. Bleeding events were more common in patients with a higher procedural residual flow event rate (P = 0.03). A higher AF recurrence rate indicated higher rates of embolism events (P = 0.04) and residual flow (P = 0.03) during follow-up.

Conclusions

Bleeding events were more common in patients with a higher procedural residual flow event rate. However, combined CA and LAAC therapy is reasonably safe and efficacious in patients with nonvalvular AF. Further studies on the safety and efficacy of CA or LAAC alone are necessary in future.

A left atrial appendage closure combined procedure review: Past, present, and future perspectives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents the most common cardiac arrhythmia worldwide; it poses a great burden in terms of quality of life reduction and yearly stroke risk. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a stroke prevention strategy that has been proven a viable alternative to antithrombotic regimens in nonvalvular AF patients. LAAC can be performed as a standalone procedure or alongside a concomitant AF transcatheter ablation, in a procedure known as "Combined procedure". Aim of this study is to summarize the scientific evidence backing this combined strategy.

METHODS

We reviewed the whole Medline indexed combined procedure literature, to summarize all the combined procedure study data.

RESULTS

Nine published studies regarding combined procedure were found. Data, aims, and scientific rationales were reported and commented.

CONCLUSION

LAA combined procedure appears to be a safe and effective procedure; a careful patient selection is necessary to maximize its benefit.

Anatomy and Physiologic Roles of the Left Atrial Appendage: Implications for Endocardial and Epicardial Device Closure

The left atrial appendage has been implicated as a major nidus for thrombus formation, particularly in atrial fibrillation. This discovery has prompted substantial interest in the development of left atrial appendage exclusion devices aimed at decreasing systemic thromboembolism risk. Its deceptively simple appearance belies the remarkable complexity that characterizes its anatomy and physiology. We highlight the key anatomic features and variations of the left atrial appendage as well as its relationships with surrounding structures. We also summarize crucial anatomic factors that should be taken into account by the interventional cardiologist when planning for or performing left atrial appendage exclusion procedures.