Atrial Appendage Occlusion In Patients Research Articles

Abstract 12871: Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Introduction: Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased stroke risk in comparison to those without HCM. The role of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in these patients is unclear. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified patients with HCM and AF using the National Readmission Dataset from 2016-19. Patients were stratified based on LAAO status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of any stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic), TIA, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was a composite of major bleeding and pericardial complications. Individual components of the primary outcomes were secondary outcomes. Patients were matched using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Cox-proportional hazard regression was applied to calculate hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) on matched cohorts. Results: We identified 71,980 patients with HCM and AF. Of these, 1,351 (1.9%) patients underwent LAAO. Those who underwent LAAO were significantly younger than those who did not (67.5±10.1 years vs. 70.0±13.1 years, p<0.001) and were more likely to be male (54.6% vs. 45.4%). LAAO was associated with a lower risk of the primary efficacy outcome (2.5% vs. 5.4%, HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.17-0.88; p=0.024) and the primary safety outcome (2.9% vs. 6.8%, HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.23-0.66, p=0.001). LAAO associated with reduced major bleeding (1.6% vs. 6.0%, HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18-0.64, p=0.001), GI bleeding (0.2% vs. 1.3%, HR 0.22; 95% CI: 0.06-0.79, p=0.02), blood transfusions requiring admission (2.10% vs. 4.90%, HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.73, p=0.004), and admissions for bleeding (0.50% vs. 2.30%, HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.58, p=0.003). Pericardial complications were similar in both groups. Conclusion: LAAO was associated with a lower risk of stroke and major bleeding in patients with HCM and AF. Future prospective studies on the safety and efficacy of LAAO in concurrent AF and HCM are needed.

Abstract 9985: Thirty Day Readmission Outcomes of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Cancer

Introduction: Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has been rapidly evolving since FDA’s approval in 2015, and has become more of a same-day-discharge procedure. Cancer patients who underwent LAAO are known to have more inpatient complications and longer hospital stay. Readmission data, however, were rarely studied in this patient population. Hypothesis: Readmission burden is relatively high in cancer patients who received LAAO. Methods: Data were derived from the National Readmission Database from 2016 to 2019. Patients with primary diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or flutter admitted for percutaneous LAAO (ICD-10 code 02L73DK) were grouped by cancer as a secondary diagnosis. We assessed inpatient mortality, length of stay, total charges and procedure complications from index hospitalization. We also compared readmission rate and most common readmission reasons. Stata SE 17.0 was used for data analysis. Results: There were 49882 index hospitalizations for LAAO, among which 1545 (3.1%) patients had a secondary diagnosis of cancer. From index hospitalizations, Patients with cancer had higher inpatient mortality (0.65% vs 0.14%, p=0.007), longer length of stay (1.54±0.08 vs 1.31±0.01, p<0.001) and higher total charges (120.25±3.44 vs 117.29±2.40, p<0.001). There was no statistical significance of 30-day readmission rate between patients with cancer and patients without cancer (10.0% vs 9.1%, p=0.34). The most common readmission reason in cancer patients was gastrointestinal bleeding. Conclusions: Readmission utilization is comparable between patients with cancer and patients without cancer who underwent LAAO.

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure With a Novel LAA Occluder for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation.

More than 90% of thromboses originate from the left atrial appendage (LAA) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of LAA closure with the Leftear device (Pulse Scientific) in NVAF patients. A prospective, multicenter, registry-based study was conducted in 200 NVAF patients with CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, female sex) scores≥2. The primary safety endpoint was defined as any serious adverse events. Efficacy was assessed by a primary composite endpoint of hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiac or unexplained death at 1 year of follow-up. The device was implanted in 196 patients, with 1-stop LAA closure combined with atrial fibrillation ablation implemented in 133 patients. The immediate success rate was 100%. There were serious adverse events in 9 patients (4.5%; 95%CI: 1.6%-7.4%), which mainly occurred in 1-stop LAA closure. All pericardial tamponades occurred in 6patientswith 1-stop LAA closure. No patient experienced a major bleeding event or acute device-related thrombus. During the 12-month follow-up period, the risk of the primary composite endpoint was 1.6% (95%CI: 0.3%-4.5%), and statistical noninferiority was achieved (the upper bound of 95%CI: 4.5%< the prespecified maximum annual incidence of 8.0%). Ischemic stroke occurred in 1 patient, 3 patients had incomplete LAA sealing, and no delayed device-related thrombus was found. LAA closure with the novel disc-like occluder shows high procedural success, satisfactory safety, andencouraging efficacy for stroke prevention in patients with NVAF. Compared with 1-stop LAA closure, single LAAclosure may be more tolerable. (A multicenter, single-arm clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage system for left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation; ChiCTR1900023035).

TCT-397 Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin as Antithrombotic Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Gastrointestinal Bleeding

TCT-397 Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin as Antithrombotic Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with blood cell dyscrasia.

Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with blood cell dyscrasia.

Concomitant Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: a Review.

In this review, we discuss some of the observational studies that examined the impact of left atrial appendage occlusion on stroke, the Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Study (LAAOS) III research program that provided definitive evidence for the benefit of surgical left atrial appendage occlusion on ischemic stroke, and high priority studies in the field that should be pursued by the surgical community. Atrial fibrillation is common in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Oral anticoagulants are effective at preventing strokes related to atrial fibrillation; they have been the standard of care for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation for decades. Most strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation originate from the left atrial appendage. LAAOS III, a large randomized controlled trial, has recently demonstrated that concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for another indication reduces the risk of stroke or systemic embolism on top of oral anticoagulation. Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion reduces the risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2 undergoing cardiac surgery for another indication. The role of surgical left atrial appendage occlusion with patients without atrial fibrillation, as a substitute to anticoagulation and as a standalone procedure, remains unclear.

Adverse events and stroke prevention by interventional left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with low CHA2 DS2 -VASc score-results from the multicenter German LAARGE registry.

Interventional left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is routinely performed in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and contraindications to standard anticoagulation. We investigated its role in patients at low stroke risk, and compared the effectiveness and safety in patients with low versus high risk. LAARGE is a prospective registry depicting the clinical reality of LAAO. LAAO was conducted with different standard commercial devices, and follow-up period was 1 year. Patients with started procedure and documented CHA2 DS2 -VASc score were selected from the whole database. A total of 638 patients from 38 centers were divided into CHA2 DS2 -VASc score ≤2, i.e., low-risk group (10.2%), and >2, i.e., high-risk group (89.8%). The latter had a pronounced cardiovascular risk profile and preceding strokes (0% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). Implantation success was consistently high (97.6%), frequencies of intrahospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (0% vs. 0.5%) and other major complications (4.6% vs. 4.0%) were low (each p = not significant [NS]). Numerous moderate complications were also observed in the low-risk patients (12.3% vs. 9.4%; p = NS). Frequencies of nonfatal strokes (0% vs. 0.7%) and severe bleedings (0% vs. 0.7%) were low (each p = NS). In a specific analysis, patients at very high risk of stroke (i.e., CHA2 DS2 -VASc score >4) did not have increased rates of complications or nonfatal strokes in the first year after the procedure. Low-risk patients had no nonfatal strokes and major bleedings within 1 year after hospital discharge but had unexpectedly high rates of moderate procedural complications. The indication in these patients should be strictly defined based on an individual benefit-risk assessment.

Comparison of the Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients Aged

The mean age in clinical trials of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has been <75 years. We aimed to better understand the safety of LAAO in older patients. National Inpatient Sample and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes were used to identify patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAO during the years 2016-2018. Patients were grouped by age <75 and ≥75 years. Baseline characteristics; length of stay; cost; hospital mortality; and other adverse events, including hematoma, vascular complications, perforation/tamponade, and stroke/ transient ischemic attack, were compared for the 2 groups. A total of 6,877 patients were identified, of whom 4,160 (60.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Length of stay and hospitalization costs were similar for the 2 groups. There were 10 deaths in patients aged ≥75 years and 1 death in patients aged <75 years (p=0.059). The incidence of perforation/tamponade was 1.3% in patients aged ≥75 years versus 0.6% for those <75 years (p=0.008). This difference persisted on multivariate analysis (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 3.07). The risk of perforation/tamponade was also higher in female patients (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.63 to 4.59). There was a trend toward higher combined procedure-related adverse events (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.15) in patients ≥75 years. There was no difference in the individual components of hematoma, vascular complication, and stroke/transient ischemic attack between both groups. In conclusion, percutaneous LAAO was associated with a higher risk of perforation and tamponade in older patients, particularly women.

Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with left ventricular assist device.

Thromboembolic (TE) events are among the most common and devastating adverse events in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (cf-LVAD). Given the high burden of AF among cf-LVAD patients, we sought to evaluate the effect of concomitant surgical LAAO in patients receiving cf-LVAD. A systematic search using electronic databases was performed using the keywords: "left atrial appendage occlusion" and "left ventricular assist device." Statistical analysis was performed using metapackage for R version 4.0 and Rstudio version 1.2. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) random-effects model was used to summarize data between two groups. The primary outcomes included: (a) stroke; (b) LVAD pump thrombosis; (c) all-cause mortality RESULTS: Three studies with a total of 305 patients (LAAO=68 and No-LAAO=237) were included in the analysis. HeartMate II (39%) and Heartware (27.5%) were the two most common cf-LVADs utilized, while only 5% received HeartMate III. At a mean follow up of 1.47 years, LAAO group had a lower risk of stroke (8.8%vs. 15.2%, RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.28-1.49), LVAD pump thrombosis (1.5%vs. 3.8%, RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.05-1.55) and all-cause mortality (5.9%vs. 20.2%, RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.19-2.52) when compared with no-LAAO group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Concomitant surgical LAAO at the time of cf-LVAD implantation demonstrated a trend toward positive outcomes and was not associated with adverse outcomes during the follow-up period, though the results were not statistically significant.

Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE) Position paper: Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide. Thromboembolism from the left atrial appendage (LAA) is the most feared complication in patients with AF. The cornerstone for the management of AF is oral anticoagulation to reduce the incidence of cardioembolic stroke. There is, however, a significant proportion of patients who cannot undergo long-term oral anticoagulation. Transcatheter LAA occlusion is an evolving technology with proven benefits in terms of AF-related stroke prevention, representing a valid alternative to anticoagulation for high-risk patients with contraindications for long-term oral anticoagulation. This has resulted in the development of a plethora of transcatheter devices to achieve endocardial occlusion or epicardial exclusion of the LAA.A panel of expert Italian cardiologists gathered under the aegis of the Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE) with the aim of reviewing the most relevant aspects of LAA occlusion, underlying anatomy and pathophysiology, summarizing current clinical knowledge, and discussing the practicalities of available devices and imaging techniques. Finally, the position paper highlights the importance of an adequate environment and of an appropriate organization in order to optimize all steps of the procedure.

Clinical Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Previous Intracranial or Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Insights from the Logic (Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Gastrointestinal or Intracranial Bleeding) International Multicenter Registry

Clinical Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Previous Intracranial or Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Insights from the Logic (Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Gastrointestinal or Intracranial Bleeding) International Multicenter Registry

Long-term results of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease.

IntroductionThe coexistence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of thromboembolic complications, as well as hemorrhagic incidents – percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative.AimTo evaluate the long-term outcomes of LAAO performed in patients with CKD and non-valvular AF.Material and methodsTwo hundred and seventy-two patients with AF who underwent LAAO between 2009 and 2019 were prospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: CKD (105 patients) and non-CKD (167 patients) (cut-off point: eGFR 60 ml/min/1.73 m2). The mean follow-up period was 25.56 months.ResultsThe LAAO was successful in 269 (98.9%) patients. Seven (2.6%) patients suffered an ischemic stroke, including 2 (1.9%) with CKD and 5 (3.0%) in the non-CKD (p = 0.581) group. The risk of ischemic stroke was 0.25/100 patient-years (PY) for CKD and 0.39/100 PY for the non-CKD (p =0.028) group. The LAAO was associated with a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 96.4% (CKD group) and 91.8% (non-CKD group) on average compared to expected stroke rates. Hemorrhagic stroke occurred in 1 (0.6%) patient of the non-CKD group, whereas major bleeding occurred in 1 (0.6%) non-CKD patient and 1 (1.0%) CKD patient (p = 0.427). The risk of major bleeding was 0.13/100 PY for CKD and 0.15/100 PY for non-CKD (p = 0.768), corresponding to an RRR of 97.9% (CKD) and 97.4% (non-CKD) on average compared to oral anticoagulant therapy.ConclusionsConsidering the significant reduction in thromboembolic events, with a simultaneous reduction of major bleeding complications, LAAO is a safe and effective alternative for AF patients with CKD.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation and contraindication to oral anticoagulation.

AimsThis study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) compared to standard stroke prevention care for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and contraindication to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in a Swedish healthcare and public sector perspective.Methods and resultsWe used a combined decision tree and cohort Markov model to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime horizon with LAAO compared to standard of care where the treatment effect is based on a recent meta-analysis. According to our analysis, LAAO gives more QALYs than standard of care (7.11 vs. 6.12). Furthermore, LAAO treatment is related to the first-year cost of 14 984 Euro (EUR) and higher average healthcare costs over the lifetime by about 4010 EUR, which gives an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LAAO vs. standard of care at 4047 EUR per gained QALY. From a public sector perspective, LAAO reduces average costs due to substantial reductions in long-term care and, thus, implies that LAAO is dominant from a public sector perspective (lower average costs and better health outcomes).ConclusionFrom both Swedish healthcare and public sector perspectives, LAAO can be considered cost-effective compared to standard of care for individuals with AF and contraindication to OAC. However, these results must be confirmed in health economic evaluations alongside the ongoing randomized clinical trials.Key QuestionIs left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) cost-effective for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and contraindication to oral anticoagulation (OAC) compared to the standard of care from a Swedish healthcare and public sector perspective?Key FindingLAAO is associated with lower cost than the standard of care from a public sector perspective and an incremental cost of 4010 Euro from a healthcare perspective. Furthermore, LAAO is related to better health outcomes than the standard of care.Take Home MessageTreatment with LAAO among individuals with AF and contraindication to OAC can be considered as cost-effective compared to the standard of care from a Swedish healthcare and public sector perspective.

479 Safety and effectiveness of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with chronic kidney disease

Abstract Aims Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) might be particularly attractive in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, owing to a high thromboembolic risk and an even higher risk of bleeding. We sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LAAO in CKD patients. Methods and results A total of 1238 patients undergoing LAAO at six centres were enrolled. On the basis of kidney function, as assessed via the CKD-EPI formula, patients were classified in two groups. Group1 had a GFR value ≤60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (CKD stages 3a-b, 4, and 5), whereas Group2 had a function &amp;gt;60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (CKD stages 1 and 2). Predicted annual rates of TE or major bleeding events were compared to the annualized observed risk of the two populations. Compared to Group 2 (n = 720, 47.5% males), patients in Group 1 (n = 518, 86.5% males) were older (mean age: 78 ± 8 vs. 75 ± 8, P &amp;lt; 0.001), and were at higher risk (CHA2DS2-VASc: 4.7 ± 1.4 vs. 4.4 ± 1.4; HAS-BLED: 3.8 ± 1.1 vs. 3.2 ± 1.0; P &amp;lt; 0.001 for both). Procedural complications (within 7 days) were observed in 3.1% of patients in Group1 and 4.6% of those in Group2 (P = 0.18); of them, major procedural adverse events occurred in 10 patients of Group1 [1.9%; four gastrointestinal (GI) bleedings, four tamponades, one myocardial infarction, one retroperitoneal hematoma] and in 15 (2.1%; seven pericardial tamponades, five retroperitoneal hematomas, two strokes, and one GI bleeding) of Group2 (P = 0.84). During a mean follow-up of 11.5 ± 7 months (1183 pt/years), 10 stroke/TIA (1.9%) and 25 major bleeding events (4.8%; 18 GI and 7 intracranial) were observed in Group1. Rate of TE events was not statistically different between groups (1.9% vs. 2.6%; P = 0.41); major bleedings had a significantly higher incidence in Group 1 (4.8% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.02). Based on the estimated annual TE risk according to the CHA2DS2-VASc score (4.76% in Group1 and 4.51% in Group 2), the % risk reduction after LAAO was 57.5% and 38.8%, respectively. Based on the estimated annual major bleeding risk based on the HAS-BLED score (7.31% in Group1 and 5.39% in Group2), the % bleeding risk reduction was 30.9% and 54.2%. Conclusions LAAO is a safe and effective approach in CKD patients. Given the increased risk of bleeding and contraindications to oral anticoagulation, CKD patients might be good candidates for LAA occlusion.

Abstract 9424: Single versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Stroke Prevention Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With High Bleeding Risk

Introduction: The optimal antiplatelet therapy following Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in atrial fibrillation patients who are not candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation therapy (OAC) is subject to debate. Hypothesis: Is single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) safe and effective when compared to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with high bleeding risk? Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search for all studies that compared the use of SAPT with DAPT following LAAO for patients in whom OAC is deemed highly risky or contraindicated. The outcomes of our study were device-related thrombosis (DRT), stroke and systemic embolization (SSE), and major bleeding (MB). The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented as summary statistics and were calculated using a random-effects model. Results: A total of 15 observational studies with 3231 patients (SAPT, n=1036; DAPT, n=2195; 64.5% men; median follow-up duration 12 months; mean age 74.7±8.5 years; CHA2DS2-VASc score 4.3±1.6; HASBLED score 3.2±1.2) were included. For DRT, data were available from 10 studies (2910 patients); there was no difference between SAPT and DAPT groups (2.6% vs. 2.3%; RR: 1.41; 95%CI: 0.77-2.59; P=0.26; I 2 :0%). For SSE (8 studies, 959 patients); although numerically more events were observed in the SAPT group, there was no statistical difference between the two groups in the pooled analysis (2.9% vs. 1.5%; RR: 5.43; 95%CI: 0.74-39.81; P=0.1; I 2 :78%). Finally, for MB (8 studies, 1818 patients); although numerically more events were observed in the DAPT group, there was no statistical difference between the two arms (2.3% vs. 3.2%; RR: 1.90; 95%CI: 0.46-7.87; P=0.37; I 2 :72%). Conclusions: Our study showed comparable safety and efficacy profiles for SAPT and DAPT after LAAO. Adequately powered randomized studies determining the optimal antithrombotic therapy in the first weeks after LAAO are warranted in patients at high risk for bleeding.

Abstract 11688: Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer

Introduction: Prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer is challenging as patients are at increased bleeding and thrombotic risk. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has evolved as a promising strategy for stroke prevention with protentional to reduce bleeding risk, though no data exists on its efficacy in patients with cancer. Hypothesis: LAAO is a safe and effective strategy for reducing stroke and bleeding risk in cancer patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAO at all Mayo Clinic sites from 2017-2020 and identified those who had undergone prior or current treatment for cancer. Baseline demographics, malignancy history, atrial fibrillation parameters, procedural success/complications, stroke and bleeding incidence and major adverse cardiac events were ascertained. Results: 55 patients were included in the study; 44 (80.0%) were male and mean age was 79.0 ± 6.1 years. Most common primary malignancies included prostate cancer (29.1%), oropharyngeal cancer (12.7%), and melanoma (10.9%) with 15 (27.3%) having metastatic disease and 14 (25.5%) patients having active malignancy at device implant. Mean CHA2DS2-Vasc score was 4.9 ± 1.3, with 47 (85.5%) patients having a prior bleeding event. Acute procedural success was achieved in all patients with 30-day complications including 4 (7.3%) with vascular access site bleeding, 1 (1.8%) with pericarditis and 1 (1.8%) with a seizure. At a follow up of 1.8 ± 1.1 years, ischemic stroke occurred in 2 (3.6%) patients with bleeding complications in 5 (9.1%) patients. Device related complications occurred in 6 (10.9%) patients with 4 (7.3%) with device thrombosis and 2 (3.6%) with a peri-device leak. Death occurred in 14 (25.5%) patients most commonly due to malignancy progression (9.1%) and infection (7.3%). Conclusions: In our study cohort, LAAO in patients with cancer was achieved with excellent procedural success and offered reasonable reduction in stroke and bleeding risk. Mortality was high likely due to the age of the patients studied, underlying malignancy and comorbidities. Further studies are needed to investigate the prevalence of device thrombosis in cancer patients.

Comparison of variants of anesthesia for left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fbrillation

Objective: comparison of general anesthesia (GA) and intravenous conscious sedation during left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO).Materials and Methods. The study included 120 patients from LAAO Register at the National Medical Research Center of Cardiology, who were divided into GA (n = 100) and intravenous sedation (n = 20) groups. In-hospital outcomes were assessed, as well as outcomes and data of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) at 45 days and 6 months.Results. 3 patients required intraoperative conversion of the anesthetic method to GA. The duration of the procedure, the time of fluoroscopy, the amount of contrast medium, and the technical success did not differ signifcantly between the two groups. The incidence of in-hospital complications in the GA group was 10%, and 15% in the intravenous sedation group (p = 0.453). There were no statistically signifcant differences between the groups in long-term outcomes and TEE data after 45 days and 6 months.Conclusion. Combined intravenous sedation with local anesthesia is an effective and fairly safe method of anesthesiological support for implantation of the occluder of the left atrial auricle. It can be used in patients with a high risk of GA, with predictable difculties of tracheal intubation, as well as if the patient wishes accordingly. The limitations of the use of intravenous sedation in combination with local anesthesia are anatomical variants of SFM that are difcult for occluder implantation, as well as the patient's low tolerance to ECG in consciousness.

Routine left atrial appendage occlusion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a narrative review.

New evidence suggests a greater prevalence of protracted postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) than previously recognized. The left atrial appendage (LAA) is the most common source of embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In this review, we ask whether there is evidence to support routine LAA occlusion (LAAO) in patients without preexisting atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery. Overall, available studies are small, inconsistent and have varying proportions of patients with and without preexisting atrial fibrillation. There is considerable discrepancy with respect to the efficacy of LAAO in reducing the risk of POAF-related stroke. Only one study reported a lower rate of stroke in the LAAO group compared with no LAAO. Two studies included a subgroup analysis of patients that developed POAF and report a significantly higher rate of stroke in patients that developed POAF and did not undergo LAAO. There are three clinical trials ongoing that are investigating prophylactic LAAO in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: ATLAS, LAA-CLOSURE and LAACS-2. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend routine addition of LAAO to lower the risk of postoperative stroke. Ongoing clinical trials will provide important insight into the role of routine LAAO in all patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Role of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with HeartMate 3.

OBJECTIVESLeft atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) at the time of implantation may reduce thromboembolic events (TEs) during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device support. The HeartMate 3 (HM3) reduces TEs overall, but the efficacy of LAAO in HM3 is unknown.METHODSAdults receiving first HM3 implantation from November 2014 through December 2019 at a single, large medical centre were retrospectively reviewed. TEs included device thrombosis and ischaemic stroke. Patients were classified by whether they received LAAO or not. Incidence of TEs was compared between groups using cumulative incidence curves with competing risks (death and heart transplant) and risk factors for TEs were assessed with Fine and Gray competing risk regression.RESULTSA total of 182 patients received HM3, of whom 99 (54%) received LAAO versus 83 (46%) who did not. There were 14 TEs, including 13 strokes (7%) and 1 pump thrombosis (0.5%). No significant difference in the incidence of TEs in each group was found (Gray’s test: P = 0.35). LAAO was not associated with TEs in multivariable Fine–Gray analysis (P = 0.10) and no significant risk factors for TEs were found. There were zero disabling strokes in those who received LAAO compared to 6 (7%) in those who did not receive LAAO (P = 0.008).CONCLUSIONSA low number of TEs was observed in HM3 recipients. LAAO did not further reduce the overall rate of TEs in this patient population, though its use may be beneficial in preventing disabling ischaemic strokes after HM3 implantation.

Comparing the adverse outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with diabetes

Abstract Introduction In patients with atrial fibrillation, it is estimated that greater than 90 percent of left atrial thrombi are located in the left atrial appendage. Multiple percutaneously implanted devices have been approved worldwide for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) to reduce stroke risk in patients not suitable for long-term oral anticoagulation. Device implantation has been associated with a high success rate and low risk for peri-procedural complications. However, as the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise, there is a considerable need to establish peri-procedural risk in these patients. Purpose This study aimed to evaluate and compare the in-hospital outcomes of LAAO in patients with and without diabetes. Methods We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis using the 2018 National Inpatient Sample. All patients aged 18 years and older with atrial fibrillation and LAAO-related hospitalizations were included in this study. To mitigate selection bias and control for patient and institutional imbalances, propensity scoring method was used to select matched sample between patients with diabetes and patients without diabetes. The scoring was based on a multivariate logistic regression model accounting for age, gender, race, hospital type, hospital region, hospital teaching status, median household income, and medical comorbidities. Using an 8-to-1-digit match, we paired each admission in the diabetes group with one admission without diabetes. Results We identified a total of 3572 patients admitted for LAAO; 1298 of these patients had comorbid diabetes. Diabetics did not have a higher risk of in-hospital mortality with LAAO (0.2% vs 0.3%, p=0.620). The risk for 17 out of the 18 identified peri-procedural complications was similar in patients with and without diabetes. However, diabetes was associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (Adjusted OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.05–2.93, p=0.03). Interestingly, 0 endocarditis events were captured in both groups, indicating that this complication is only seen in long-term follow-up and had a peri-procedural risk of 0%. Conclusion As the use of implantable LAAO devices increases worldwide, clinicians should be cognizant of the increased risk for peri-procedural acute kidney injury in diabetics. Patients with diabetes often have diabetes-induced chronic kidney disease with susceptibility to acute injury. Therefore, volume status should be closely monitored in the peri-procedural period to mitigate further damage to the kidneys in these patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Characteristics of the matched cohortOutcomes in the matched cohort