Late clinical outcomes of lambre versus amplatzer occluders for left atrial appendage closure

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.

Appropriate Use Criteria of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices: Latest Evidences

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrythmia and it is linked to an increased risk of stroke. Even if anticoagulation therapy reduces the rate of stroke the benefits of this therapy have to been balanced with the increased risk of hemorrhagic event. Left atrial appendage closure is a valid alternative to long term anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and high hemorrhagic risk. Actually new devices with different features have been tested and introduced progressively in the clinical practice. Improvements preprocedural imaging evaluation and the learning curve of the operators led to percutaneous left atrial appendage closure a safe and effective procedure. A good knowledge of different devices and the technique of implant is necessary for optimization percutaneous left atrial appendage closure and the reduction of complications during the acute phase and follow up.

Occluding morphologically complicated left atrial appendage using the small-umbrella LAmbre device

Background

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is effective for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. LAA can have a complex anatomy, such as multiple lobes or a large orifice, which may render it unsuitable for occlusion using regular devices. We aimed to investigate the feasibility, safety, and short-term efficacy of the small-umbrella LAmbre device for morphologically complicated LAA.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 129 consecutive patients who underwent LAA occlusion using the LAmbre device; the small-umbrella LAmbre device was used in 30 of these patients. We analyzed patients’ characteristics, procedural details, and outcomes.

Results

Twenty-two patients (73.3%) had multilobed (≥ 2) LAA. The umbrella of the occluder was anchored in the branch in 9 patients and in the common trunks of branches in 13 patients. The landing zone and orifice diameters were 19.0 ± 4.39 mm and 27.4 ± 3.95 mm, respectively. The sizes of the umbrella and occluder cover were 22.0 ± 3.42 mm and 34.3 ± 2.75 mm, respectively. At 3-month follow-up transesophageal echocardiography in 24 patients, no peri-device residual flow was reported. Device thrombosis was detected in one patient at 3 months and disappeared after 3 months of anticoagulation. Ischemic stroke occurred in one patient; no other adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

Occlusion of morphologically complicated LAA using the small-umbrella LAmbre device was feasible, safe, and effective in patients with atrial fibrillation in this study. This occluder provides an alternative for patients who cannot be treated with regular-sized LAA occlusion devices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-022-02770-y.

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.

Percutaneous Treatment Approaches in Atrial Fibrillation: Current Landscape and Future Perspectives

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained arrhythmia in clinical practice, represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality, with an increasing prevalence. Pharmacologic treatment remains the cornerstone of its management through rhythm and rate control, as well as the prevention of thromboembolism with the use of oral anticoagulants. Recent progress in percutaneous interventional approaches have provided additional options in the therapeutic arsenal, however. The use of the different catheter ablation techniques can now lead to long arrhythmia-free intervals and significantly lower AF burden, thus reducing the rate of its complications. Particularly encouraging evidence is now available for patients with persistent AF or concomitant heart failure, situations in which catheter ablation could even be a first-line option. In the field of stroke prevention, targeting the left atrial appendage with percutaneous device implantation may reduce the risk of thromboembolism to lower rates than that predicted with conventional ischemic risk scores. Left atrial appendage occlusion through the approved Watchman or Amplatzer devices is a well-established, efficacious, and safe method, especially in high-ischemic and bleeding risk patients with contraindications for oral anticoagulation.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure with the LAmbre Device - Initial Multicentre Experience in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has been an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

OBJECTIVES

To report the first results of an initial multicenter experience in Brazil and to investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of LAA closure with the new LAmbre device.

METHODS

We collected procedural and follow-up data of 51 consecutive patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, restrictions for long-term OAC and suitable anatomy that underwent LAA closure with the LAmbre device in 18 centers in Brazil. Procedural indications were significant bleeding under OAC (47.1%), stroke or persistent LAA thrombus despite OAC (27.5%), bleeding plus stroke (17.6%), other clinical contraindications for OAC (5.9%), and patient's choice due to sports practice (1.9%).

RESULTS

Twenty-five men (49%) and 26 women (51%), with a mean age of 76±7.7 years, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.6± 1.7 and mean HAS-BLED score of 3.4± 1.1 were studied. Procedural success rate was 100%. Procedure-related immediate complications were pericardial effusion in two patients, and immediate device embolization in one case. No large residual shunts (> 5 mm) were observed, and small shunts (<5mm) were detected in four patients by color Doppler at the end of the procedure. After a mean follow-up of 18 ± 12 months, there were no deaths, strokes nor any other major complications.

CONCLUSION

LAA occlusion with the LAmbre device was safe and effective in this small case series. Despite these encouraging initial results, the small number of cases warrants further studies with longer-term follow-up.

Emergency surgical retrieval of a migrated LAmbre device through the mitral valve

Left atrial appendage occlusion has become an alternative for long-term anticoagulation for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Although the procedure is safe, life-threatening complications such as embolization of the device or cardiac tamponade might occur. We present a case of a LAmbre device that migrated 4 days after being implanted and remained trapped in the mitral valve. Secondary massive mitral regurgitation with severe stenosis and haemodynamic instability required emergency surgery. The device was successfully removed, but severe damage in the anterior leaflet and chords forced a valve replacement.

Delayed pericardial effusion after left atrial appendage closure with the LAmbre device: Importance of a fully open umbrella

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate whether a modified implantation method facilitating a fully open umbrella can reduce the pericardial effusion/pericardial tamponade (PE/PT) rate after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with the LAmbre device compared with the conventional method (CM) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with NVAF who received either isolated LAAC or combined catheter ablation and LAAC using the LAmbre device at the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University from January 2018 to December 2019 were enrolled. CM was used for device implantation in the initial 59 patients, while a modified method (MM) was used in the remaining 165 patients. Successful implantation was achieved in 98.3% of patients in the CM group and 98.8% in the MM group. A higher rate of a fully open umbrella (98.8% vs. 69%, p < .001), less requirement for recapture (46% vs. 62.1%, p = .036), and a lower incidence of delayed PE/PT (1.2% vs. 8.6%, p = .005) were found in the MM group compared with the CM group. All of the five delayed PT events occurred in patients with combined treatment. An umbrella that was not fully open was the only factor associated with delayed PE/PT events in a multivariable Cox model.

CONCLUSIONS

LAAC with the LAmbre device using an MM significantly increases the rate of a fully open umbrella and decreases the requirement for recapture and the incidence of delayed PE/PT. This method is more effective in patients with combined treatment.

Plugs for left atrial appendage occlusion: an overview of available devices

INTRODUCTION

Approximately one-third of all ischemic strokes and the ensuing health and economic burden can be attributed to the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF). The global prevalence of AF continues to rise, thus making it by far the most common diagnosed cardiac arrhythmia. Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion or obliteration has been developed to protect from the occurrence of stroke in patients with nonvalvular AF.

AREAS COVERED

We address the characteristics and techniques for implantation as well as some clinical registries and randomized trials of the various catheter-based devices for the occlusion of the LAA that are either currently available or in the clinical evaluation stage.

EXPERT OPINION

Over less than 2 decades, LAA occlusion progressed from being a concept applied in a few specialized centers to a globally recognized procedure implemented in numerous hospitals as part of daily interventional practice. The respective devices are to date safer and easier to deploy than initially. Periprocedural and postprocedural complications will continue to decrease as already evident from prospective randomized trials and registries. Although current indications focus on patients with nonvalvular AF and contraindications for oral anticoagulation, it is all but certain that the future will bring a widening in the spectrum of indications, applicability, and usage of these devices.