Arrhythmias and Device Therapies in Cardiac Amyloidosis

Cardiac amyloidosis is caused by amyloid fibrils that deposit in the myocardial interstitium, causing restrictive cardiomyopathy and eventually death. The electromechanical, inflammatory, and autonomic changes due to amyloid deposition result in arrhythmias. Atrial fibrillation is by far the most common arrhythmia. The rate control strategy is generally poorly tolerated due to restrictive filling physiology and heart rate dependance, favoring adoption of the rhythm control strategy. Anticoagulation for stroke prophylaxis is warranted, irrespective of CHA2DS2-VASc score in patients with a favorable bleeding profile; data on left appendage closure devices are still insufficient. Ventricular arrhythmias are also not uncommon, and the role of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in cardiac amyloidosis is controversial. There is no evidence of improvement in outcomes when used for primary prevention in these patients. Bradyarrhythmia is most commonly associated with sudden cardiac death in cardiac amyloidosis. Pacemaker implantation can help provide symptomatic relief but does not confer mortality benefit.

Who watches the WATCHMAN? A rare case of lower extremity paralysis

We present a case study involving an elderly patient who experienced dislodgement of a recently implanted WATCHMAN device. Initially, the patient exhibited multiple musculoskeletal symptoms, which raised concerns about alternative causes such as cauda equina syndrome or spinal epidural hematoma. Despite vascular surgery removing the device, the patient's condition deteriorated due to ischemia leading to multisystem organ failure. This case highlights the critical need for emergency physicians to promptly diagnose acute aortic obstruction caused by embolization, given the increasing use of the WATCHMAN device in the aging population to reduce the reliance on anticoagulation. The potential for significant ischemic consequences necessitates immediate intervention to mitigate complications.

First-in-Human Experience of Using a Universal Steerable Sheath in Implanting Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices

Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) device implantation may be challenging in cases with difficult LAA anatomy. A deflectable sheath to approach multiple LAA positions may be helpful. We used a deflectable sheath to implant LAAC devices in 20 patients and included 60 cases using the standard sheaths for comparison. The procedures were successful in all patients without peri-procedural complications. After a median follow-up of 1.52 (IQR: 0.76-2.33) years, none of the patients in the deflectable sheath group had peri-device leak ≥3 mm and experienced thromboembolic stroke. In the standard sheath group, after follow-up of 2.03 (IQR: 0.87-3.19) years, 2 had peri-device leak ≥3 mm and 1 experienced thromboembolic stroke. We first proved the idea of using a universal steerable sheath for LAAC device implantation in difficult LAA anatomy, which also allows rapid switching of different LAAC devices.

A Case of Delayed Hemorrhagic Effusive-Constrictive Pericarditis After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device Placement

This report describes a case of pericardial effusion and tamponade that appeared several weeks after WATCHMAN device (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) placement for left atrial appendage occlusion. The report also discusses the likely etiology and clinical management of this uncommon condition. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Postapproval Community Hospital Experience in the United States with Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device (Watchman)

BACKGROUND

To review the procedural safety and postimplantation complications of Watchman device implanted at 2 community hospitals for primary prevention of systemic embolization in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who were not candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC).

METHODS

This was a retrospective case series of 48 patients carried out in 2 community hospitals in the United States. Patients with NVAF who had a CHADS2 higher than 2 or CHADS2VASc2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack [TIA] or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, and female gender) score of 3 or higher and were not candidates for long-term OAC. These patients were selected for implantation of Watchman device. They were followed up at 45 days, 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months after implantation of Watchman device to assess for complications involving the device and to determine if anticoagulation could be discontinued at the 45 days follow-up. They were monitored for any systemic thromboembolism while off anticoagulation.

RESULTS

The success rate of device implantation was 98% (48 of 49). Only a single patient could not get Watchman implantation because of unfavorable left atrial appendage anatomy. Access-related and device implantation-related complications were zero (0%). At 45 days follow-up and end of follow-up duration, the rate of thrombus formation on the Watchman device was 4% (2 of 48). One patient had TIA after warfarin discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

With improved procedural technique and well-trained operators, Watchman implantation is feasible in a community hospital also.