Intracardiac vs Transesophageal Echocardiography for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion With Watchman FLX in the U.S.

Abstract

BackgroundIntraprocedural imaging is critical for device delivery in transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). Although pivotal trials of LAAO devices were conducted using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is an emerging imaging modality. ObjectivesThis study compared outcomes after ICE- and TEE-guided Watchman FLX implantation in the SURPASS (SURveillance Post Approval AnalySiS Plan) nationwide LAAO registry. MethodsBaseline characteristics were compared using chi-square and t-tests. Outcomes were reported in unadjusted and adjusted comparisons via propensity weighting. ResultsBetween August 2020 and September 2021, LAAO was attempted in 39,759 patients at 698 sites, including 2,272 cases (5.7%) with ICE and 31,835 (80.0%) with TEE. ICE and TEE patients had similar baseline characteristics and mean procedural times (ICE 82 minutes vs TEE 78 minutes). ICE patients were less likely to receive general anesthesia (54% vs 98%, P < 0.01). Successful device implantation (98.3% vs 97.6%) and complete seal rates at 45 days were similar (n = 25,280; 83% vs 82%). Most adverse event rates were similar; unadjusted mortality rates at 45 days were 1.1% for ICE vs 0.8% for TEE (P = 0.14), and 1.0% vs 0.7% (P = 0.27) in adjusted analyses. Even after adjustment, pericardial effusion rates requiring intervention were significantly higher with ICE at 45 days (1.0% vs 0.5%; P = 0.02). This rate decreased as operators performed more ICE-guided procedures, although 82% of operators had performed <10 ICE-guided procedures overall. ConclusionsIn the largest comparison to date, ICE use was infrequent. ICE and TEE both achieved high rates of complete LAAO. ICE was associated with significantly higher rates of pericardial effusion requiring intervention.