Half-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulation Versus Standard Antithrombotic Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

ObjectivesThis study evaluated the long-term efficacy of a standard antithrombotic strategy versus half-dose direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) after Watchman implantation.BackgroundNo consensus currently exists on the selection of the most effective antithrombotic strategy to prevent device-related thrombosis (DRT) in patients undergoing endocardial left atrial appendage closure.MethodsAfter successful left atrial appendage closure, consecutive patients were prescribed a standard antithrombotic strategy (SAT) or long-term half-dose DOAC (hdDOAC). The primary composite endpoint was DRT and thromboembolic (TE) and bleeding events.ResultsOverall, 555 patients (mean age 75 ± 8 years, 63% male; median CHA₂DS₂-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category] score 4 [interquartile range (IQR): 3-6]; median HAS-BLED [hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol] score 3 [IQR: 2-4]) were included. Patients were categorized into 2 groups (SAT: n = 357 vs hdDOAC: n = 198). Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups. The median follow-up duration was 13 months (IQR: 12-15 months). DRT occurred in 12 (2.1%) patients, all in the SAT group (3.4% vs 0.0%; log-rank P = 0.009). The risk of nonprocedural major bleeding was significantly more favorable in the hdDOAC group (0.5% vs. 3.9%; log-rank P = 0.018). The rate of the primary composite endpoint of DRT and TE and major bleeding events was 9.5% in SAT patients and 1.0% in hdDOAC patients (HR: 9.8; 95% CI: 2.3-40.7; P = 0.002).ConclusionsAfter successful Watchman implantation, long-term half-dose DOAC significantly reduced the risk of the composite endpoint of DRT and TE and major bleeding events compared with a standard, antiplatelet-based, antithrombotic therapy.     

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants in High-Risk Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BackgroundPercutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is noninferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for preventing atrial fibrillation (AF)–related stroke. However, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have an improved safety profile over VKAs, and their effect on cardiovascular and neurological outcomes relative to LAAC is unknown.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare DOACs with LAAC in high-risk patients with AF.MethodsLeft Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation (PRAGUE-17) was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing LAAC with DOACs. Patients were eligible to be enrolled if they had nonvalvular AF; were indicated for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and had a history of bleeding requiring intervention or hospitalization, a history of a cardioembolic event while taking an OAC, and/or a CHA₂DS₂-VASc of ≥3 and HAS-BLED of >2. Patients were randomized to receive LAAC or DOAC. The primary composite outcome was stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death, major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding, or procedure-/device-related complications. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat.ResultsA high-risk patient cohort (CHA₂DS₂-VASc: 4.7 ± 1.5) was randomized to receive LAAC (n = 201) or DOAC (n = 201). LAAC was successful in 181 of 201 (90.0%) patients. In the DOAC group, apixaban was most frequently used (192 of 201; 95.5%). At a median 19.9 months of follow-up, the annual rates of the primary outcome were 10.99% with LAAC and 13.42% with DOAC (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 to 1.31; p = 0.44; p = 0.004 for noninferiority). There were no differences between groups for the components of the composite endpoint: all-stroke/TIA (sHR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.40 to 2.51), clinically significant bleeding (sHR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.52), and cardiovascular death (sHR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.62). Major LAAC-related complications occurred in 9 (4.5%) patients.ConclusionsAmong patients at high risk for stroke and increased risk of bleeding, LAAC was noninferior to DOAC in preventing major AF-related cardiovascular, neurological, and bleeding events. (Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation [PRAGUE-17]; NCT02426944)     

Peridevice Leak After Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: An Analysis of the Amulet IDE Trial

BackgroundPeridevice leak (PDL) is a limitation of left atrial appendage occlusion.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the incidence of and outcomes associated with PDL in the Amulet IDE (AMPLATZER? Amulet? LAA Occluder Trial) randomized controlled trial.MethodsPatients with atrial fibrillation at increased stroke risk were randomly assigned to undergo either Amulet (dual occlusive mechanism) or Watchman 2.5 (single occlusive mechanism) device implantation. Transesophageal echocardiography was performed at 45 days and 12 months postprocedure. Clinically significant PDL was defined as ≥3 mm. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, and the secondary endpoint was stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate 18-month cumulative event rates landmarked at day 45 postprocedure.ResultsA total of 1,593 patients underwent successful left atrial appendage occlusion and had an evaluable transesophageal echocardiographic studies at 45 days. The dual–occlusive mechanism device provided superior closure (defined as leak <3 mm) compared with the single–occlusive mechanism device at 45 days (88.9% vs 74.1%; P < 0.01) and 12 months (90.5% vs. 78.3%; P < 0.01). Through 18 months, PDL was associated with a higher, but not statistically significant, risk for the primary endpoint (3.6% vs 1.8%; adjusted HR: 1.98; 95% CI: 0.93-4.19; P = 0.07) and a statistically significantly higher risk for the secondary endpoint (8.1% vs. 4.7%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.02-2.69; P = 0.04).ConclusionsThe dual–occlusive mechanism device provided superior closure compared with the single–occlusive mechanism device at both 45 days and 1 year postprocedure. PDL ≥3 mm was associated with a significantly increased 18-month risk for the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. Completeness of closure of the left atrial appendage has important implications for patient outcomes. (AMPLATZER? Amulet? LAA Occluder Trial [Amulet IDE]; NCT02879448)     

First Experience of Transcatheter Leak Occlusion With Detachable Coils Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and efficacy of transcatheter leak closure with detachable coils in patients with incomplete left atrial appendage (LAA) closure.BackgroundIncomplete LAA closure is common after interventional therapies targeting the LAA, potentially hindering effective thromboembolic prevention. Detachable coils have found a wide range of applications for transcatheter vascular occlusion and embolization procedures.MethodsThirty consecutive patients at high thromboembolic risk with clinically relevant residual leaks (mean age 72 ± 9 years, 73.3% men, mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 4.4 ± 1.4, mean HAS-BLED score 3.6 ± 0.8) underwent percutaneous closure of the LAA patency using embolization coils. Transesophageal echocardiography was performed at 60 ± 15 days post-procedure.ResultsLAA closure had been previously attempted with the Watchman device in 25 patients, the Amulet device in 2 patients, and the LARIAT device in 3 patients. Baseline transesophageal echocardiography documented moderate and severe leaks in 20 (66.7%) and 10 (33.3%) patients, respectively. After a single procedure, 25 patients (83.3%) showed complete LAA sealing or minimal leaks. Five patients (16.7%) had moderate residual leaks; 3 patients of them were offered repeat procedures. Mean procedure and fluoroscopy times were 76 ± 41 min and 21 ± 14 min, respectively; the mean volume of iodinated contrast medium used was 80 ± 47 ml. Coil deployment was successful in all cases. The overall complication rate was 6.1%. After a median follow-up period of 54 days (range 43 to 265 days) and an average of 1.1 procedures/patient, transesophageal echocardiography revealed complete LAA sealing or negligible residual leaks in 28 patients (93.3%; 25 with no residual leak, 3 patients with minimal to mild residual leaks) and moderate residual leaks in 2 patients (6.7%).ConclusionsTranscatheter LAA leak occlusion using endovascular coils appears to be a safe, effective, and promising approach in patients at high echo time risk with incomplete LAA closure. (Transcatheter Leak Closure With Detachable Coils Following Incomplete Left Atrial Appendage Closure Procedures [TREASURE]; NCT03503253)     

Association of Hospital Procedural Volume With Outcomes of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the association between percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) procedural volume and in-hospital outcomes.BackgroundSeveral studies have demonstrated an inverse volume-outcome relationship for patients undergoing invasive cardiac procedures. Whether a similar association exists for percutaneous LAAO remains unknown.MethodsPatients undergoing LAAO in 2017 were identified in the Nationwide Readmissions Database. Hospitals were categorized into 3 groups on the basis of tertiles of annual procedural volume: low (5 to 15 cases/year), medium (17 to 31 cases/year), and high (32 to 211 cases/year). Multivariate hierarchical logistic regression and restricted cubic spline analyses were performed to examine the association of hospital LAAO volume and outcomes. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse events (MAE), defined as a composite of mortality, stroke or transient ischemic attack, bleeding or transfusion, vascular complications, myocardial infarction, systemic embolization, and pericardial effusion or tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis or surgery.ResultsThis study included 5,949 LAAO procedures performed across 196 hospitals with a median annual procedural volume of 41 (interquartile range: 25 to 67). Low-volume hospitals had higher rates of in-hospital MAE (9.5% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001), stroke or transient ischemic attack (2.1% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.049), and bleeding or transfusion (6.1% vs. 3.5%; p = 0.002) compared with high-volume hospitals. No differences were noted for other components of MAE and index length of stay. On multivariate analysis, higher procedural volume was associated with lower rates of in-hospital MAE, with an adjusted odds ratio for medium versus low volume of 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.04; p = 0.08) and for high versus low volume of 0.55 (95% confidence interval: 0.37 to 0.82; p = 0.003).ConclusionsHigher hospital procedural volume is associated with better outcomes for LAAO procedures. Further studies are needed to determine if this relationship persists for long-term outcomes.     

Oral Anticoagulation for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Long-Term Dialysis

BackgroundPatients on long-term dialysis are at increased risk of bleeding. Although oral anticoagulants (OACs) are recommended for atrial fibrillation (AF) to reduce the risk of stroke, randomized trials have excluded these populations. As such, the net clinical benefit of OACs among patients on dialysis is unknown.ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through June 10, 2019, for studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of different OAC strategies in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. The efficacy outcomes were ischemic stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and the safety outcome was major bleeding.ResultsThis study identified 16 eligible observational studies (N = 71,877) regarding patients on long-term dialysis who had AF. Only 2 of 16 studies investigated direct OACs. Outcomes for dabigatran and rivaroxaban were limited to major bleeding events. Compared with no anticoagulants, apixaban and warfarin were not associated with a significant decrease in stroke and/or systemic thromboembolism (apixaban 5 mg, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 1.17; apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.93; warfarin, HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.16). Apixaban 5 mg was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality (vs. warfarin, HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.93; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.90; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.90). Warfarin was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban 5 min/2.5 mg and no anticoagulant (vs. apixaban 5 mg, HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.88; vs. apixaban 2.5 mg, HR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.82; vs. no anticoagulant, HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.50). Dabigatran and rivaroxaban were also associated with significantly higher risk of major bleeding than apixaban and no anticoagulant.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that OACs were not associated with a reduced risk of thromboembolism in patients with AF on long-term dialysis. Warfarin, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban were associated with significantly higher bleeding risk compared with apixaban and no anticoagulant. The benefit-to-risk ratio of OACs in patients with AF on long-term dialysis warrants validation in randomized clinical trials.     

Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Liver Disease

BackgroundAdvanced liver disease is known to increase the risk for bleeding and affects the hepatic clearance and metabolism of drugs. Subjects with active liver disease were excluded from pivotal clinical trials of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), so the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of DOACs in patients with liver disease is lacking.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare DOACs with warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and liver disease.MethodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, subjects with atrial fibrillation and active liver disease treated with oral anticoagulation were included (12,778 with warfarin and 24,575 with DOACs), and analyzed ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, major bleeding, all-cause death, and the composite outcome. Propensity score weighting was used to balance covariates between the 2 groups.ResultsDOACs were associated with lower risks for ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.548; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.485 to 0.618), intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.479; 95% CI 0.394 to 0.581), gastrointestinal bleeding (HR: 0.819; 95% CI: 0.619 to 0.949), major bleeding (HR: 0.650; 95% CI: 0.575 to 0.736), all-cause death (HR: 0.698; 95% CI: 0.636 to 0.765), and the composite outcome (HR: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.567 to 0.656) than warfarin. Among the total study population, 13% of patients (n = 4,942) were identified as having significant active liver disease. A consistent benefit was observed in patients with significant active liver disease (HR for the composite outcome: 0.691; 95% CI: 0.577 to 0.827).ConclusionsIn this large Asian population with atrial fibrillation and liver disease, DOACs showed better effectiveness and safety than warfarin, which was consistent in those with significant active liver disease.     

Clinical Outcomes at 1 Year Following Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the United States

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to report 1-year clinical outcomes following commercial transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in the United States.BackgroundThe National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry was initiated to meet a condition of Medicare coverage and allow the assessment of clinical outcomes. The 1-year rates of thromboembolic events after transcatheter LAAO in such a large cohort of “real-world” patients have not been previously reported.MethodsPatients entered into the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry for a Watchman procedure between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, were included. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke. Key secondary endpoints included the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, mortality, and major bleeding. Major bleeding was defined as any bleeding requiring hospitalization, and/or causing a decrease in hemoglobin level > 2g/dL, and/or requiring blood transfusion that was not hemorrhagic stroke. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for 1-year estimates of cumulative event rates.ResultsThe study population consisted of 36,681 patients. The mean age was 76.0 ± 8.1 years, the mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc score was 4.8 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.0 ± 1.1. Prior stroke was present in 25.5%, clinically relevant bleeding in 69.5%, and intracranial bleeding in 11.9%. Median follow-up was 374 days (IQR: 212-425 days). The Kaplan-Meier–estimated 1-year rate of ischemic stroke was 1.53% (95% CI: 1.39%-1.69%), the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was 2.19% (95% CI: 2.01%-2.38%), and the rate of mortality was 8.52% (95% CI: 8.19%-8.87%). The 1-year estimated rate of major bleeding was 6.93% (95% CI: 6.65%-7.21%). Most bleeding events occurred between discharge and 45 days following the procedure.ConclusionsThis study characterizes important outcomes in a national cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter LAAO in the United States. Clinicians and patients can integrate these data in shared decision making when considering this therapy.     

Patient-Level Analysis of Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Practice Versus Clinical Trials

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare outcomes among patients from the PROTECT-AF (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) and PREVAIL (Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy) left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) trials with matched patients from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry using patient-level data.BackgroundPatients undergoing LAAO in clinical practice generally have more comorbidities than trial participants.MethodsPropensity-matched analyses, with up to 3 registry patients matched to each trial patient, were performed using Cox proportional hazards and Fine-Gray models.ResultsA total of 1,904 registry patients were matched to 667 trial LAAO patients; 1,010 registry patients were matched to 348 warfarin patients. Compared with registry patients, trial LAAO patients experienced more pericardial effusion requiring intervention (3.8% vs 0.6%, P < 0.001), periprocedural ischemic stroke (0.9% vs 0.2%, P = 0.005), and failed device implantation (7.5% vs 3.6%, P < 0.001). The 425-day risk of ischemic stroke in trial LAAO patients was higher than in registry patients (2.70% vs 1.21%; HR: 1.951; P = 0.03); warfarin patients had comparable rates of ischemic stroke compared with registry patients (1.15% vs 1.29%; HR: 0.728; P = 0.57). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was similar among trial LAAO and registry patients (P = 0.88). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was greater among warfarin patients versus registry patients (1.44% vs 0.20%; HR: 5.871, P = 0.03). Mortality was lower in trial LAAO patients than in registry patients (2.92% vs 6.23%; HR: 0.477; P = 0.004), a difference attributable to noncardiovascular deaths. Mortality was similar (P = 0.44) among trial warfarin (4.48%) and registry (5.86%) patients.ConclusionIn clinical practice, patients who meet trial criteria and undergo LAAO experience a lower risk of ischemic stroke, a similar risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and a higher risk of death after implant versus LAAO trial patients. (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [PROTECT-AF], NCT00129545; Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy [PREVAIL], NCT01182441)     

Peridevice Leak Following Amplatzer Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Cardiac Computed Tomography Classification and Clinical Outcomes

ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate cardiac computed tomography (CT) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) peridevice leak (PDL) assessments, and the clinical relevance of PDL.BackgroundPDL assessment is integral during follow-up after left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion. Comparative studies of TEE and cardiac CT are sparse, and the clinical relevance of PDL is uncertain.MethodsThis was a single-center observational study of consecutive patients undergoing LAA occlusion with Amplatzer devices (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet) between 2010 and 2018 (N = 415). Patients with both 8-week CT and TEE were included for analysis (n = 346). Images were analyzed by blinded investigators (K.K. and A.S.). PDL on cardiac CT was classified from grade 1 to 3, based on PDL at the device disc, device lobe, and LAA contrast patency. Primary clinical outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, or all-cause death.ResultsPDL was present in 110 patients (32%) by TEE, with 29 (8%) >3 mm. By cardiac CT, 210 patients (61%) had PDL at the disc, with contrast patency in 204 patients (59%). A grade 3 PDL (gap at disc, lobe, and LAA contrast patency) was present in 63 patients (18%). Bland-Altman analysis showed poor agreement between CT and TEE for leak sizing. CT and TEE detected PDL was not significantly associated with worse outcome, hazard ratio: 1.82 (95 % confidence interval: 0.95 to 3.50); p = 0.07 and hazard ratio: 1.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 2.76); p = 0.28, respectively.ConclusionsPDL occurrence is substantially higher with CT compared with TEE, with a large discrepancy between modalities in leak quantification. A novel CT-based classification is proposed, yet PDL was not associated with worse clinical outcome.     

Procedural and Short-Term Results With the New Watchman FLX Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device

ObjectivesThis study sought to report early experience with the new-generation Watchman FLX device (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts).BackgroundThe new-generation Watchman FLX features a reduced height, improved anchoring and fabric coverage, and a closed distal end. These design modifications aim to simplify implantation, allow full recapture and repositioning, and reduce peridevice leak and device-related thrombosis.MethodsA total of 165 patients undergoing left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion (LAAO) with Watchman FLX were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter registry at 12 centers participating in the European limited market release program.ResultsMean age was 75.4 ± 8.9 years, and CHA₂DS₂-VASc score 4.4 ± 1.4. A total of 128 patients (77.6%) had a history of major bleeding, including previous intracranial hemorrhage in 55 cases (33.3%). LAA landing zone minimal and maximal mean diameters were 19.1 ± 3.6 mm and 22.3 ± 3.7 mm, and 24.2% of LAA were considered complex by dimensions. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Successful implantation at first attempt was achieved in 129 cases (78.2%), and a second device was required in 6 cases (3.6%). Procedure-related complications occurred in 3 patients (1.8%): 2 access-related (1.2%) and 1 pericardial effusion (0.6%). No peri-procedural strokes, deaths, or device embolizations occurred. Forty-nine patients (29.7%) were discharged with single antiplatelet therapy, 105 (63.6%) on dual antiplatelet, and 11 (6.7%) on anticoagulation. Imaging follow-up displayed just 1 peridevice leak ≥5 mm and 7 cases of device-related thrombosis (4.7%). During a median follow-up of 55 days (interquartile range: 45 to 148 days), there were 6 hemorrhagic complications (4.8%), 1 patient (0.8%) had an ischemic stroke, and 1 (0.8%) died. No late device embolizations occurred.ConclusionsLAAO with the Watchman FLX is safe and effective in a wide range of LAA morphologies, with a low procedural complication rate, high degree of LAA sealing, and favorable short-term efficacy.     

Watchman Occlusion in Long-Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Larger Left Atrial Appendages With Greater Residual Leak

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare patients with and without long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) undergoing Watchman left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion.BackgroundAn increased burden of atrial fibrillation is associated with progressive left atrial remodeling and enlargement.MethodsTransesophageal echocardiography (TEE) measures of LAA ostial diameter and depth, device compression, and residual leak were evaluated in 101 consecutive Watchman cases. The patients were categorized into LSPAF (n = 48) or non-LSPAF (n = 53) groups and compared.ResultsThe average LAA ostial diameter for LSPAF versus non-LSPAF by TEE omniplane at 0° was 21.1 ± 4.1 mm versus 18.2 ± 3.6 mm (p = 0.0002); at 45° was 18.7 ± 3.4 mm versus 16.3 ± 3.1 mm (p = 0.0004); at 90° was 19.6 ± 3.8 mm versus 16.2 ± 3.4 mm (p = 0.00001); and at 135° was 21.0 ± 4.1 mm versus 18.0 ± 4.1 mm (p = 0.0005). The average LAA depth for LSPAF versus non-LSPAF by TEE at 0° was 28.1 ± 6.4 mm versus 25.2 ± 4.9 mm (p = 0.02); at 45° was 27.9 ± 5.8 mm versus 25.1 ± 4.3 mm (p = 0.007); at 90° was 27.2 ± 5.2 mm versus 22.8 ± 3.7 mm (p = 0.0001); and at 135° was 25.6 ± 5.4 mm versus 21.5 ± 3.8 mm (p = 0.0001). In successfully treated patients, 77% of the LSPAF group received larger device (27, 30, or 33 mm) implants versus only 46% in the non-LSPAF group (p = 0.003). While both groups had similar rates of moderate (3 to 5 mm) leaks at implant (2% vs. 0%; p = 0.14), 27% of the LSPAF vs. 4% of the non-LSPAF group had moderate leaks (p = 0.04) on 6-week follow-up TEE.ConclusionsPatients with LSPAF have significantly larger LAA sizes, require larger devices, and have more residual leak on follow-up TEE. LSPAF may represent a higher risk group that warrants more stringent long-term follow-up.     

The NCDR Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry

BackgroundLeft atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation has been evaluated in 2 randomized trials; post-approval clinical data are limited.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to describe the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) LAAO Registry and present patient, hospital, and physician characteristics and in-hospital adverse event rates for Watchman procedures in the United States during its first 3 years.MethodsThe authors describe the LAAO Registry structure and governance, the outcome adjudication processes, and the data quality and collection processes. They characterize the patient population, performing hospitals, and in-hospital adverse event rates.ResultsA total of 38,158 procedures from 495 hospitals performed by 1,318 physicians in the United States were included between January 2016 and December 2018. The mean patient age was 76.1 ± 8.1 years, the mean CHA₂DS₂-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, 65 years of age and older, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, 65 to 74 years of age, female) score was 4.6 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly) score was 3.0 ± 1.1. The median annual number of LAAO procedures performed for hospitals was 30 (interquartile range: 18 to 44) and for physicians was 12 (interquartile range: 8 to 20). Procedures were canceled or aborted in 7% of cases; among cases in which a device was deployed, 98.1% were implanted with <5-mm leak. Major in-hospital adverse events occurred in 2.16% of patients; the most common complications were pericardial effusion requiring intervention (1.39%) and major bleeding (1.25%), whereas stroke (0.17%) and death (0.19%) were rare.ConclusionsThe LAAO Registry has enrolled >38,000 patients implanted with the device. Patients were generally older with more comorbidities than those enrolled in the pivotal trials; however, major in-hospital adverse event rates were lower than reported in those trials.     

Conformal Left Atrial Appendage Seal Device for Left Atrial Appendage Closure: First Clinical Use

ObjectivesThe authors report the first clinical experience with the Conformal Left Atrial Appendage Seal (CLAAS) device.BackgroundThe CLAAS device was designed to address the limitations of first-generation left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices by providing an implant that is minimally traumatic, can be deployed in a noncoaxial fashion, and does not require postprocedural oral anticoagulation.MethodsPatients with atrial fibrillation at high stroke risk (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥2) were recruited using standard selection criteria. The LAAC procedure was guided by transesophageal echocardiography with patients under general anesthesia. The CLAAS device is composed of a foam cup, with a Nitinol endoskeleton with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene cover, delivered with a standard delivery system using a tether for full recapture. All patients received dual-antiplatelet therapy for 6 months, followed by aspirin alone. Transesophageal echocardiographic follow-up was scheduled for 45 days and 1 year.ResultsTwenty-two patients (63.7% with CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores ≥3, 76.2% with HAS-BLED scores ≥3) were enrolled. The device was successfully implanted in 18 patients and unsuccessfully in 4 patients. There were no serious procedural complications. On transesophageal echocardiography performed at 45 days, 1 significant leak (≥5 mm) was seen, which was due to a large posterior lobe not appreciated at the time of implantation, and 1 device-related thrombus was noted, which resolved on oral anticoagulation. There were no periprocedural strokes, major pericardial effusions, or systemic or device embolization.ConclusionsThis first-in-human study demonstrates the clinical feasibility of the CLAAS device for LAAC.     

Clinical Outcomes With Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair in Atrial Functional MR From the EXPAND Study

BackgroundAlthough transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes and improve quality of life in patients with symptomatic secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) and left ventricular dysfunction, its effect in patients with atrial SMR (aSMR) has not been well described.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the safety, echocardiographic outcomes, and clinical effectiveness of TEER for aSMR.MethodsPatients with aSMR in the prospective, observational, multicenter EXPAND (A Contemporary, Prospective, Multi-Center Study Evaluating Real-World Experience of Performance and Safety for the Next Generation of MitraClip Devices) study were identified by an echocardiography core laboratory. Follow-up occurred at discharge, 30 days, and 1 year. Key endpoints included mitral regurgitation (MR) severity, functional class, heart failure hospitalizations, mortality, and 30-day major adverse events.ResultsAmong 1,041 patients enrolled in EXPAND, 835 patients had evaluable echocardiograms at baseline. Of these, 53 patients had aSMR and 360 had ventricular SMR (vSMR). In the aSMR cohort, TEER resulted in a significant reduction in MR through 1 year (MR grade ≤2 in 100.0%), significantly increased 1-year Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (+26.6 ± 30.5 points; P < 0.0001), and improved functional class from baseline, similar to the effects among patients with vSMR (MR grade ≤2 in 99.5% at 1 year, 1-year increase in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score 21.23 ± 24.92 points). Major adverse events at 30 days and leaflet adverse events at 1 year were infrequent in both groups.ConclusionsIn a prospective, real-world, global registry, TEER for aSMR was associated with significant MR reduction and improvement in quality of life and functional class, similar to patients with vSMR. This suggests that TEER may provide clinical benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation with SMR in the setting of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. (The MitraClip® EXPAND Study of the Next Generation of MitraClip® Devices; NCT03502811)     

Incidence,Characterization, and Clinical Impact of Device-Related Thrombus Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Prospective Global AMPLATZER Amulet Observational Study

ObjectivesThis study sought to report the incidence, characteristics, and clinical impact of device-related thrombus (DRT) following left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with the AMPLATZER Amulet device (Abbott, Plymouth, Minnesota).BackgroundDRT is a potential serious complication of LAAO, but the incidence and clinical impact of DRTs in a real-world setting are not well characterized.MethodsA total of 1,088 patients were enrolled in a multicenter prospective study and followed for 1 year. All events were adjudicated by an independent committee, including the presence of DRT. Patients with DRT were reviewed for suboptimal device implantation and characterization of DRT formation. Multiple Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of DRT formation.ResultsDevice implantation was successful in 1,078 (99%) patients, with 1-year follow-up completed in 96.3% of patients. A total of 18 DRTs occurred in 17 patients (1.7%/year), as a second DRT developed following complete resolution of an initial DRT in 1 patient. The left upper pulmonary vein ridge was not covered by the Amulet disc in 82% of DRT patients, indicating suboptimal implantation, with most thrombus developing in the untrabeculated area of the LAA ostium between the pulmonary vein ridge and the upper edge of the disc. Three (18%) DRT patients had an ischemic stroke, all within 3 months of DRT diagnosis. Patients with a DRT were at a greater risk for ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack compared with non-DRT patients (hazard ratio: 5.27; 95% confidence interval: 1.58 to 17.55; p = 0.007). Larger LAA orifice width was a predictor of DRT formation (hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.19; p = 0.04).ConclusionsFollowing LAAO with the AMPLATZER Amulet device, DRT was observed infrequently. Although the presence of DRT was associated with an increased rate of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack as compared with patients without DRT, the large majority of DRT patients (82%) did not experience any ischemic neurologic events.