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.     

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)     

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.     

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.     

Clinical Outcomes Associated With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation

ObjectivesThis study sought to investigate clinical outcomes associated with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with high-risk atrial fibrillation (AF).BackgroundLAAO has been shown to be noninferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF. However, anticoagulation with DOACs is now preferred over warfarin as thromboprophylaxis in AF.MethodsPatients with AF enrolled in the Amulet Observational Registry (n = 1,088) who had successful LAAO with the Amplatzer Amulet device (n = 1,078) were compared with a propensity score–matched control cohort of incident AF patients (n = 1,184) treated by DOACs identified from Danish national patient registries. Propensity score matching was based on the covariates of the 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) and HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol) scores for predicting stroke and bleeding. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium ≥3), or all-cause mortality, and follow-up was 2 years.ResultsAF patients treated with LAAO had a significantly lower risk of the primary composite outcome as compared with patients treated with DOACs (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49 to 0.67). Total events and event rates per 100 patient-years were (LAAO vs. DOACs) 256 vs. 461 and 14.5 vs. 25.7, respectively. The risk of ischemic stroke was comparable between groups (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.75), while risk of major bleeding (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.79) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.64) were significantly lower in patients treated with LAAO.ConclusionsAmong high-risk AF patients, LAAO in comparison with DOACs may have similar stroke prevention efficacy but lower risk of major bleeding and mortality.     

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)     

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.     

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.     

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)     

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.     

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)     

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)     

The Association of Chronic Kidney Disease With Outcomes Following Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the associations of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with in-hospital and short-term outcomes using a large national database representative of contemporary clinical practice.BackgroundCKD and ESRD are associated with increased risk for stroke and bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may provide a reasonable alternative for these patients; however, the impact of CKD and ESRD on in-hospital and short-term outcomes following LAAC remain largely unknown.MethodsThe Nationwide Readmissions Database was used to identify LAAC procedures from 2016 to 2017 in patients with no CKD, CKD (stages I-V), and ESRD. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess in-hospital and short-term outcomes. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsOf 21,274 patients who underwent LAAC during the study period, 3,954 (18.6%) had CKD and 571 (2.7%) had ESRD. ESRD was associated with increased risk for in-hospital mortality compared with no CKD (3.3% vs 0.4%; adjusted odds ratio: 6.48; 95% confidence interval: 3.35-12.50; P < 0.001) and CKD (3.3% vs 0.5%; adjusted odds ratio: 11.43; 95% confidence interval: 4.77-27.39; P < 0.001). CKD was associated with increased risk for in-hospital acute kidney injury or hemodialysis and stroke or transient ischemic attack. ESRD and CKD were associated with increased readmissions extending to 90 days compared with no CKD, and ESRD was associated with increased readmissions compared with CKD. There was no difference with respect to other in-hospital outcomes.ConclusionsESRD is associated with higher in-hospital mortality, and CKD is associated with higher rates of stroke or transient ischemic attack in patients undergoing LAAC. Further research is needed to assess the impact of CKD and ESRD on long-term outcomes in these patients.     

Outcomes of Combined Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Peripheral Vascular Intervention in the United States

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the prevalence and real-world outcomes of patients who require peripheral vascular intervention during the same hospitalization as transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared with TAVR alone.BackgroundThere are limited data on the prevalence and outcomes of combined TAVR and percutaneous peripheral vascular intervention.MethodsAll patients who underwent TAVR in 2016 and 2017 were identified using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. Outcomes of patients undergoing TAVR alone were compared with those of patients undergoing combined TAVR and peripheral intervention, TAVR and peripheral intervention with and without a history of peripheral artery disease, and alternative-access TAVR with transfemoral TAVR in individuals undergoing peripheral intervention. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 99,654 hospitalizations were identified, among which 4,397 patients (4.42%) underwent peripheral intervention during the same admission as TAVR. Patients who required peripheral intervention had increased mortality (4.2% vs 1.5%; P < 0.001), stroke (3.5% vs 1.8%; P < 0.001), acute kidney injury (17.6% vs 10.8%; P < 0.001), blood transfusion (16.0% vs 11.3%; P < 0.001), 30-day readmission (16.3% vs 12.1%; P < 0.001), median length of stay (4 days [IQR: 2-8 days] vs 3 days [IQR: 2-5 days]; P < 0.001), and hospitalization charges. Compared with patients undergoing peripheral intervention to facilitate transfemoral TAVR, alternative-access TAVR was associated with increased mortality (4.6% vs 3.0%; P = 0.036), acute kidney injury (22.7% vs 14.3%; P < 0.001), median length of stay (5 days [IQR: 3-10 days] vs 4 days [IQR: 2-7 days]; P < 0.001), and 30-day readmission (18.1% vs 15.5%; P = 0.012).ConclusionsPeripheral vascular intervention may be used to facilitate transfemoral access or as a bailout for vascular complications during TAVR. Combined TAVR and peripheral intervention is associated with an increased risk for adverse events, though outcomes are better compared with alternative-access TAVR using a nonfemoral approach.     

Clinical Outcomes Following Isolated Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Repair: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the pooled clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of different isolated transcatheter tricuspid valve repair (ITTVR) strategies for significant (moderate or greater) tricuspid regurgitation (TR).BackgroundSignificant TR is a common valvular heart disease worldwide.MethodsPublished research was systematically searched for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of ITTVR for significant TR in adults. The primary outcomes were improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and 6-minute walking distance and the presence of severe or greater TR at the last available follow-up of each individual study. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed comparing outcomes before and after ITTVR.ResultsFourteen studies with 771 patients were included. The mean age was 77 ± 8 years, and the mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score was 6.8% ± 5.4%. At a weighted mean follow-up of 212 days, 209 patients (35%) were in NYHA functional class III or IV compared with 586 patients (84%) at baseline (risk ratio: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.13-0.40; P < 0.001). Six-minute walking distance significantly improved from 237 ± 113 m to 294 ± 105 m (mean difference +50 m; 95% CI: +34 to +66 m; P < 0.001). One hundred forty-seven patients (24%) showed severe or greater TR after ITTVR compared with 616 (96%) at baseline (risk ratio: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.20-0.42; P < 0.001).ConclusionsPatients undergoing ITTVR for significant TR experienced significant improvements in NYHA functional status and 6-minute walking distance and a significant reduction in TR severity at mid-term follow-up.     

Incidence,Predictors, and Outcomes of Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the incidence and outcomes of endocarditis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundData about endocarditis after TAVR are limited.MethodsThe study investigated Medicare patients who underwent TAVR from 2012 to 2017 and identified patients admitted with endocarditis during follow-up using a validated algorithm. The main study outcome was all-cause mortality.ResultsOf 134,717 patients who underwent TAVR, 1868 patients developed endocarditis during follow-up (incidence 0.87%/year), with majority of infections (65.0%) occurring within 1 year. Incidence of endocarditis declined in recent years. The most common organisms were Staphylococcus (22.0%), Streptococcus (20.0%), and Enterococcus (15.5%). Important predictors for endocarditis were younger age at TAVR, male sex, prior endocarditis, end-stage renal disease, repeat TAVR procedures, liver and lung disease, and post-TAVR acute kidney injury. Thirty-day and 1-year mortality were 18.5% and 45.6%, respectively. After adjusting for comorbidities and procedural complications, endocarditis after TAVR was associated with 3-fold higher risk of mortality (44.9 vs. 16.2 deaths per 100 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.77 to 3.12; p < 0.0001). End-stage renal disease (aHR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.72 to 2.60), endocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock (aHR: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.56 to 4.02), ischemic stroke (aHR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.28), intracerebral hemorrhage (aHR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.76), acute kidney injury (aHR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.27 to 1.63), blood transfusion (aHR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.50), staphylococcal (aHR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.49 to 1.97), and fungal endocarditis (aHR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.23 to 2.39) (p < 0.05 for all) portended higher mortality following endocarditis.ConclusionsThe incidence of endocarditis after TAVR is low and declining. However, it is associated with poor prognosis with one-half the patients dying within 1 year.     

Propensity-Matched 1-Year Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Bicuspid and Tricuspid Patients

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare 1-year outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low surgical risk patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis to patients with tricuspid aortic stenosis.BackgroundThe pivotal TAVR trials excluded patients with bicuspid aortic valves. The Low Risk Bicuspid Study 30-day primary endpoint of death or disabling stroke was 1.3%.MethodsThe Low Risk Bicuspid Study is a prospective, single-arm, TAVR trial that enrolled patients from 25 U.S. sites. A screening committee confirmed bicuspid anatomy and valve classification on computed tomography using the Sievers classification. Valve sizing was by annular measurements. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated all serious adverse events, and an independent core laboratory assessed all echocardiograms. The 150 patients from the Low Risk Bicuspid Study were propensity matched to the TAVR patients in the randomized Evolut Low Risk Trial using the 1:1 5- to-1-digit greedy method, resulting in 145 pairs.ResultsAll-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1 year was 1.4% in the bicuspid and 2.8% in the tricuspid group (P = 0.413). A pacemaker was implanted in 16.6% of bicuspid and 17.9% of tricuspid patients (P = 0.741). The effective orifice area was similar between groups at 1 year (2.2 ± 0.7 cm² vs 2.3 ± 0.6 cm², P = 0.677) as was the mean gradient (8.7 ± 3.9 mm Hg vs 8.5 ± 3.1 mm Hg, P = 0.754). Fewer patients in the bicuspid group had mild or worse paravalvular leak (21.3% vs 42.6%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsThere were no significant differences in clinical or forward flow hemodynamic outcomes between the propensity-matched groups at 1 year.     

Impact of Echocardiographic Guidance on Safety and Efficacy of Left Atrial Appendage Closure: An Observational Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of echocardiographic guidance on the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC).BackgroundExpert consensus documents recommend intraprocedural imaging by means of either transesophageal echocardiography or intracardiac echocardiography to guide LAAC. However, no evidence exists that intraprocedural echocardiographic guidance in addition to fluoroscopy improves the safety and efficacy of LAAC.MethodsConsecutive LAAC procedures performed at a high-volume center between January 2009 and October 2020 were stratified on the basis of intraprocedural imaging modalities, including fluoroscopic guidance (FG) only or intraprocedural echocardiographic guidance (EG) in addition to fluoroscopy. The primary safety endpoint was the composite of procedure-related complications occurring within 7 days after the procedure. Technical success at 7 days and at follow-up were secondary endpoints.ResultsAmong 811 LAAC procedures, 549 (67.7%) and 262 (32.3%) were assigned to the FG and EG groups, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, EG remained associated with a lower rate of the primary safety endpoint (3.4% vs 9.1%; P = 0.004; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11-0.90; P = 0.030). Technical success trended higher at 7 days (92.1% vs 87.2%; P = 0.065; adjusted OR: 1.68; 95% CI: 0.95-3.01; P = 0.079) and was significantly improved with EG compared with FG (87.6% vs 79.9%; P = 0.018; OR: 4.06; 95% CI: 1.60-10.27; P = 0.003) after a median follow-up period of 4.9 months (interquartile range: 3.4 months-6.2 months).ConclusionsIn a large cohort of consecutive LAACs, the use of intraprocedural echocardiography to guide intervention in addition to standard fluoroscopy was associated with lower risks for procedural complications and higher mid-term technical success rates.