Does left atrial appendage closure with a cardiac plug system reduce the stroke risk in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients? A single-center case series

Clinical follow-up of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation ineligible of oral anticoagulation treatment-a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The recommended stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and increased risk of ischemic stroke is oral anticoagulation (OAC). Parts of the patient population are not eligible due to contraindication, and percutaneous left atrial occlusion (LAAO) can then be a preventive treatment option. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to estimate the long-term clinical effectiveness of LAAO as stroke prevention in patients with AF, increased risk of ischemic stroke, and contraindication to OAC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, using Poisson random effect models, to estimate the incidence rate (events per 100 patient-years) of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, and all-cause death after LAAO treatment. We also calculated the risk reduction of ischemic stroke with LAAO compared with no stroke prevention estimated through a predicted risk in an untreated population (5.5 per 100 patient-years).

RESULTS

We included 29 observational studies in our meta-analysis, including 7 951 individuals and 12 211 patient-years. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score among the patients in the included studies is 4.32. The pooled incidence rate of ischemic stroke is 1.38 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 1.08; 1.77). According to a meta-regression model, the estimated incidence rate of ischemic stroke at CHA2DS2-VASc 4 is 1.39 per 100 patient-years. This implies a risk reduction of 74.7% with LAAO compared to predicated risk with no stroke prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that LAAO is effective as stroke prevention for patients with AF, increased risk of stroke, and contraindication to oral anticoagulation.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Plasma Levels Measurement: Clinical Usefulness from Trials and Real-World Data

Measurement of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) activity is not routinely necessary. Indeed, evaluation of DOACs plasmatic concentration is discouraged for the majority of patients, due to the lack of outcome data supporting this approach. Nevertheless, DOAC measurements may be useful in emergency situations such as serious bleeding events, need for urgent invasive procedures, and acute ischemic stroke or in managing anticoagulation in "special populations" not adequately studied in clinical trials, for example the very elderly or those at the extremes of body weight. The aim of this review is to describe and summarize the methods for DOACs activity evaluation and the settings in which their plasma level measurement may be indicated, analyzing indications from scientific societies and evidence from clinical trials, as well as real world data on the usefulness of DOACs plasma levels "monitoring."

Update on Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing Cardiac Interventional Procedures: From Clinical Trials to Real-World Evidence

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are considered a first-line therapy for long-term stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and high thromboembolic risk. The potential role of DOACs in cardiac interventional procedures is a pressing clinical question, considering the increasing number of procedures and the growing prevalence of patients in DOAC therapy. The aim of this review is to provide an update on available evidence about the clinical performance of DOACs in AF patients undergoing different interventional procedures (AF cardioversion and ablation, and percutaneous coronary and structural heart disease interventions) and to explore the possible role of DOACs as an alternative therapeutic strategy in cardiac interventional procedures among non-AF patients.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Management of Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a substantially higher risk of thromboembolism, particularly stroke events, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Oral anticoagulation (OAC), while effective in reducing embolic events in AF patients, is associated with an increased bleeding risk. Thus, not all patients with AF are candidates for OAC and some are only candidates for OAC in the short term. Of the available nonpharmacologic strategies for the management of AF, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as a potential approach for reducing the risk of systemic thromboembolism in AF patients eligible for OAC. LAAO can be achieved either surgically or percutaneously using an epicardial, endocardial, or a combined approach. Although available data are limited, currently available LAAO devices, and those being developed, have shown promise in reducing bleeding risk in AF patients because of the reduced overall need for anticoagulation, while maintaining efficacy in preventing thromboembolism. The optimal device will reduce both embolic and hemorrhagic strokes, and other bleeds, with a high implant success rate and a low complication rate. Until that time, anticoagulation remains the gold standard that these devices strive to surpass, and thus LAAO devices are currently indicated in patients with relative contraindication to OAC therapy.

A meta-analysis for efficacy and safety evaluation of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

The randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies with any transcatheter LAA occlusion devices were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library from inception to November 2015. The incidence rates from individual studies were combined to evaluate the procedural efficacy and safety, including all-cause death, cardiac/neurological death, stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), thrombosis, hemorrhagic complications, and pericardial effusion/tamponade.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies involving 3585 patients and 6 different occlusion devices were eligible for our inclusion criteria. The procedural failure rate for LAA closure was 0.02 (95% CI: 0.02-0.03). The all-cause mortality was 0.03 (95% CI: 0.02-0.03) and cardiac/neurological mortality was 0 (95% CI: 0.00-0.01). The stroke/TIA rate was estimated only 0.01 (95% CI: 0.01-0.01). The incidence of thrombus on devices was 0.01 (95% CI: 0.01-0.02). The major hemorrhagic complication rate was estimated 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.01). Pericardial effusion/tamponade was estimated 0.02 (95% CI: 0.02-0.03). No heterogeneity was observed for above pooled estimates (I = 0). In devices subgroups analysis, the all-cause mortality and cardiac/neurological mortality of PLAATO group were the highest (P = 0.01 and P < 0.01 respectively), whereas the incidence of thrombus on devices in the ACP group was the highest (P < 0.01). In follow-up period subgroups analysis, there were significant differences in all-cause death, stroke/TIA, major hemorrhage, and pericardial effusion/tamponade events between the shorter and longer follow-up period subgroups (P < 0.05). However, the differences among the subgroups were numerically small.

CONCLUSIONS

the pooled data demonstrated that transcatheter LAA occlusion was effective and safe in the patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were not suitable for lifelong antithrombotic therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Stroke Prevention in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of Contemporary Studies

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion has emerged as an important treatment for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who are at high stroke risk and have contraindications for anticoagulation. However, literature about the efficacy and safety of LAA occlusion is minimal to date. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the rates of stroke events and adverse events for patients treated with occlusion devices.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, Web of Science, OVID, SCOPUS databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to December 31, 2014 for studies of percutaneous LAA occlusion for patients with NVAF. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if at least 10 patients were studied with six months or more of follow-up period and reported at least one outcome of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 2779 patients in 25 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Two were randomised control trials (RCTs), others were cohort studies. The adjusted incidence rate of stroke was 1.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-1.6/100 PY). The ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke rates were 1.1/100 PY (95% CI, 0.8-1.4/100 PY) and 0.2/100 PY (95% CI, 0.1-0.3/100 PY), respectively. The combined efficacy outcomes (stroke or transient ischaemic attacks [TIAs], systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death) was 2.7/100 PY (95% CI, 1.9- 3.4/100 PY). Major bleeding and pericardial effusions were the most commonly observed adverse events at a rate of 2.6% (95% CI, 1.5%-3.6%) and 2.5% (95% CI, 1.8%-3.2%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous LAA occlusion is a reasonably efficacious and safe therapeutic option in patients with NVAF who are at high risk for stroke and contraindicated for long-term anticoagulation.

Left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation for stroke prevention: A systemic review

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an arrthymia characterized by increased risk of ventricle arrthymias and thromboembolism especially ischemic stroke. Most thrombus originated in the left atrial appendage, thus left atrial occlusion (LAAO) may be an effective alternative for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect and safety of left atrial occlusion for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched Pub Med, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library, Embase, CBM-Disk, CNKI for published trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISI Proceedings for conference abstracts, and WHO International Clinical Trial registration Platform for ongoing studies. The search results were extracted, and then the quality of included studies was assessed. By RevMan 5.3, meta analysis was used if there was low heterogeneity. Three randomized controlled clinical trials involving 1165 participants were included (percutaneous 1114 in 2 trials, surgical 51 in 1 trial). The current data suggest that left atrial occlusion may be as efficacious as warfarin in stroke prevention (RR 0.78 [0.33, 1.84]) and mortality reduction (RR 0.68 [0.40, 1.16]) for AF.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to warfarin left atrial occlusion with Watchman device may have the same effectivity in stroke reduction. Surgical LAAO may also get positive outcomes compared with warfarin, but owing to the small sample size the evidence is less powerful. Total outcomes of percutaneous and surgical LAAO support this approach.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for prevention of stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

When anticoagulation for stroke prevention is contraindicated, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) may be performed. Studies of LAAO have been limited by their small size, disparate patient populations, and lack of control group. Our purpose was to perform a meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of LAAO in comparison with standard therapy for stroke prevention in nonvalvular AF.

METHODS

Due to the lack of a control group in studies of LAAO, data on stroke prevention from multiple large outcomes studies were used to produce a hypothetical control group based on clinical variables in the individual studies. Results were stratified according to LAAO device type.

RESULTS

We identified 16 studies with a total of 1759 patients receiving LAAO. Summary estimates demonstrate LAAO reduced risk of stroke in comparison with no therapy or aspirin therapy [relative risk (RR), 0.34; 95 % CI, 0.25-0.46] and in comparison with warfarin therapy (RR, 0.65; 95 % CI, 0.46-0.91). Summary estimates differed based on the study used to derive the hypothetical control group. Device deployment was unsuccessful in 6.1 % of patients, and overall complication rate was 7.1 %. Efficacy and safety were similar across LAAO device type although a majority of patients in the meta-analysis received a Watchman device.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that LAAO is a reasonable option for stroke prophylaxis in AF when anticoagulation is not an option, and the risk for stroke outweighs the risk of procedural complications. Data were limited with the use of most available devices. To better establish the risk and benefit of LAAO in comparison with standard therapy, more randomized controlled trials are necessary.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: an update

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia encountered in clinical practice. One of its most devastating complications is the development of thromboembolism leading to fatal or disabling stroke. Oral anticoagulation (OAC, warfarin) is the standard treatment for stroke prevention in patients with AF with an increased stroke risk. However, there are several obstacles to long-term OAC therapy, including the risk of serious bleeding, several drug–drug interactions and the need for frequent blood testing. Although newer oral anticoagulants have been developed, these drugs also face issues of major bleeding and non-compliance. Therefore, alternative treatment options for stroke prevention in patients with AF with a high stroke risk are needed. Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is an evolving therapy, which should be taken into consideration in those patients with non-valvular AF with a high stroke risk and contraindications for OAC. This article aims to discuss the rationale for LAA closure, the available LAA occlusion devices and their clinical evidence until now. Moreover, we discuss the importance of proper patient selection, the role of various imaging techniques and the need for a more tailored postprocedural antithrombotic therapy.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Stroke Prevention: Emerging Technologies

Current anticoagulant therapies aimed at stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) are increasingly challenged by a complex patient population at significant risk of bleeding. Mounting evidence shows that left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is an effective strategy for reducing stroke risk in patients with nonvalvular AF, without the need for anticoagulation. Several approaches and devices have been developed in recent years, each with their own set of advantages and disadvantages. This article reviews these approaches, identifies pertinent aspects, and outlines necessary or ongoing research in establishing LAA closure as a safe and effective approach to stroke risk reduction.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Nonrheumatic Atrial Fibrillation

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation is a common rhythm disorder, which is related to a higher risk of thrombembolism resulting in a high rate of cerebral stroke or transient ischemic attacks. According to the CHADS₂- or CHA₂DS₂Vasc-Score there is an indication for oral anticoagulation to prevent patients from mostly disabling strokes. However, more than 50% of patients are not adequately treated with oral anticoagulation due to different reasons, especially contraindications. More than 90% of thrombi develop in the left atrial appendage (LAA), which lead to the idea of developing devices to exclude the LAA from the systemic circulation to prevent patients from embolisations. Another approach is surgical ligation or removal of the LAA during operation procedures. Content: Different devices and their clinical data are discussed in this review. Available literature for most of the devices is evaluated and last but not least some surgical results are discussed at the end. Existing data of randomized and non-randomized studies show that the concept of LAA-occlusion instead of anticoagulation therapy works. However, complication rates during intervention have to be kept in mind, but with adequate training also new and inexperienced operators can do the procedure safely. Most data and the only randomized studies are available for the Watchman Device. Despite some few complications like pericardial effusions, bleeding complications and thrombus formation on the devices, the data showed a non inferiority of device-implantation in comparison with anticoagulation therapy in the first few years. In long term follow up more than 4 years after implantation, there is even a superiority of the device compared with anticoagulation therapy, safety issues are no longer significantly different despite some periprocedural complications. This has to be reflected with the background, that operators could treat 3 patients with a totally new method, thereafter all patients had to be randomized into the study. So experience was limited in the first phase of this trial. Surgical data vary much due to different techniques of LAA-occlusion. With newer devices results are also promising. Conclusion: LAA-occlusion is a developing field of interventional and surgical techniques. The concept of LAA-occlusion could be proved in one randomized trial. At least for patients contraindicated for anticoagulation therapy, LAA-occlusion is a real alternative to only aspirin therapy or doing nothing. With emerging techniques and lower complication rates, LAA-occlusion might develop to a real alternative to anticoagulation therapy, at least for vitamin-K-antagonists. There are no data available so far in comparison with new oral anticoagulants. Further studies are needed to compare device therapy with new oral anticoagulants.