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.     

Sex Differences in Safety and Effectiveness of LAAO: Insights From the Amulet IDE Trial

BackgroundWomen have higher rates of acute complications after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). However, data on long-term safety and effectiveness are limited.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine sex-specific short- and long-term outcomes after LAAO in the Amulet IDE (Amplatzer? Amulet? LAA Occluder) trial.MethodsThe following outcomes were compared between men and women: in-hospital complications, device-related outcomes (peridevice leak at 45 days and device-related thrombus at 18 months), and long-term clinical outcomes (death, thromboembolism, and bleeding). Subanalyses for the interaction between sex and device type were performed.ResultsA total of 1,833 patients underwent attempted device implantation (917 with the Amulet and 916 with the Watchman), of whom 734 were women (40%). Device success was 97.4% in men and 97.1% in women (P = 0.60). Rates of major in-hospital adverse events were higher in women (4.4% vs 1.9%; P < 0.01), driven by major bleeding (3.7% vs 1.0%; P < 0.01) and pericardial effusion requiring intervention (2.0% vs 0.5%; P < 0.01). Peridevice leak and device-related thrombus were similar in men and women (18.3% vs 18.9% [P = 0.78] and 3.3% vs 5.0% [P = 0.10], respectively). There were no differences between men and women in rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (2.6% vs 2.6%; P = 0.98), transient ischemic attack (1.3% vs 1.6%; P = 0.69), hemorrhagic stroke (0.5% vs 0.4%; P = 0.88), major bleeding (10.1% vs 10.9%; P = 0.49), cardiovascular death (4.3% vs 3.5%; P = 0.45), or all-cause death (8.9% vs 6.9%; P = 0.16).ConclusionsIn the Amulet IDE trial, long-term clinical outcomes including effectiveness following LAAO were comparable in men and women despite the higher rates of in-hospital complications due to major bleeding and pericardial effusion in women. (Amplatzer? Amulet? LAA Occluder Trial [Amulet IDE]; NCT02879448)     

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)     

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.     

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)     

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.     

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.     

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 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.     

Impact of Periprocedural Adverse Events After PCI and CABG on 5-Year Mortality: The EXCEL Trial

BackgroundThe relative risks for different periprocedural major adverse events (MAE) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on subsequent mortality have not been described.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the association between periprocedural MAE occurring within 30 days postprocedure and early and late mortality after left main coronary artery revascularization by PCI and CABG.MethodsIn the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, patients with left main disease were randomized to PCI vs CABG. The associations between 12 prespecified nonfatal MAE and subsequent 5-year all-cause and cardiovascular death in 1,858 patients were examined using logistic regression.ResultsOne or more nonfatal MAE occurred in 111 of 935 patients (11.9%) after PCI and 419 of 923 patients (45.4%) after CABG (P < 0.0001). Patients with MAE were older and had more baseline comorbidities. Within 5 years, all-cause death occurred in 117 and 87 patients after PCI and CABG, respectively. Experiencing an MAE was a strong independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both PCI (adjusted OR: 4.61; 95% CI: 2.71-7.82) and CABG (adjusted OR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.95-5.41). These associations were present within the first 30 days and between 30 days and 5 years postprocedure. Major or minor bleeding with blood transfusion ≥2 U was an independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both procedures. Stroke, unplanned revascularization for ischemia, and renal failure were significantly associated with mortality only after CABG.ConclusionsIn the EXCEL trial, nonfatal periprocedural MAE were strongly associated with early and late mortality after both PCI and CABG for left main disease.     

Retrograde Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: Predictors of Procedural Success From the ERCTO Registry

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to identify independent predictors of procedural success after retrograde chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundRetrograde CTO PCI is an established technique, but predictors of success remain poorly understood.MethodsA multivariable logistic regression model was used to analyze potentially important demographic, clinical, anatomical, and technical aspects of retrograde CTO PCI cases uploaded to the multicenter European CTO (ERCTO) Club Registry.ResultsIn calendar years 2018 and 2019, 2,364 retrograde CTO PCI cases constituted the primary analysis cohort. A primary retrograde strategy was used in 1,953 cases (82.6%), and an initial antegrade approach was converted to retrograde in 411 cases (17.4%). Procedural success was achieved in 1,820 cases (77.0%) and was more likely to occur after a primary retrograde attempt versus conversion from an initial antegrade approach (80.9% vs 58.4%; P < 0.0001). After multivariable analysis, an absence of lesion calcification (OR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.37-2.51; P < 0.0001), a higher degree of distal vessel opacification (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.72-3.55; P < 0.0001), little or no proximal target vessel tortuosity (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.28-2.64; P = 0.001), Werner collateral connection CC1 (OR: 4.87; 95% CI: 2.90-8.19; P < 0.0001) or CC2 (OR: 5.33; 95% CI: 3.02-9.42; P < 0.0001), and the top tertile of operator volume (>120 cases over 2 years) (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.26-2.79; P = 0.002) were associated with the greatest chance of achieving angiographic success.ConclusionsLess calcification with good distal vessel opacification, little or absent proximal vessel tortuosity, and visible collateral connections, along with high-volume operator status, were all independently predictive of angiographically successful retrograde CTO PCI.     

Evaluation of Multimodality LAA Leak Closure Methods Following Incomplete Occlusion: The LAA Leak Study

BackgroundIncomplete left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is an evolving topic of clinical significance and thromboembolic potential, with recent long-term studies suggesting lower cutoffs for relevant leak size.ObjectivesThe aim of this prospective observational study was to assess 3 different closure techniques for persistent peridevice leaks after incomplete LAA closure and compare their efficacy and safety outcomes.MethodsWe studied 160 patients (mean age 72 ± 9 years; 71% men) who underwent 1 of the 3 available modalities (detachable embolization coils, vascular plugs or septal occluders, and radiofrequency ablation) for residual central or eccentric leak closure. Both acute postprocedural success (closure or <1-mm leak at the end of the procedure) and closure at 1-year follow-up transesophageal echocardiography imaging were evaluated.ResultsOf 160 patients, 0.6%, 41.3%, and 58.1% had mild (1-2 mm), moderate (3-5 mm), and severe (≥5 mm) leaks, respectively. Baseline LAA closure type was 72.5% Watchman FLX, 16.3% Lariat, 5.6% surgical ligation, 1.9% AtriClip, and 1.9% Amulet. Successful closure (0- or <1-mm leak) was seen in 100% of patients in all cohorts following intervention, with overall complete closure (0-1 mm) or mild or minimal leaks (1-2 mm) on 1-year follow-up transesophageal echocardiography seen in 100% of the atrial septal occluder or vascular plug cohort, 85.9% of the coil cohort, and 83.3% of the radiofrequency ablation cohort (P < 0.001). Two patients (1.3%) experienced cardiac tamponade, and there were no deaths or other complications.ConclusionsPeridevice leaks can safely and effectively be closed using 3 different modalities depending on size and location.     

Revascularization Strategies for Patients With Femoropopliteal Peripheral Artery Disease

BackgroundNo adequately powered studies exist to compare major clinical outcomes after endovascular therapy (EVT) with stent implantation vs bypass surgery (BSx) for symptomatic femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease.ObjectivesThis study sought to perform a pooled analysis of individual patient data from all randomized controlled trials comparing EVT vs BSx.MethodsPrincipal investigators of 5 of 6 available randomized controlled trials agreed to pool individual patient data. The primary endpoint was major adverse limb events, a composite of all-cause death, major amputation, or target limb reintervention. Secondary endpoints included amputation-free survival, individual major adverse limb event components, and primary patency. Early complications were bleeding, infection, or all-cause death within 30 days.ResultsA total of 639 patients were analyzed with a mean age of 68.1 ± 9.1 years and 29.0% women. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. At 2 years, there were no significant differences between patients who received EVT and those who received BSx regarding major adverse limb events (40.1% vs 36.4%; log-rank P = 0.447; adjusted HR [aHR]: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.80-1.36), amputation-free survival (88.1% vs 90.0%; log-rank P = 0.455; aHR for death or amputation: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.63-1.71) and the other secondary endpoints except for primary patency, which was lower in patients who received EVT vs those who received BSx (51.2% vs 61.3%; log-rank P = 0.024; aHR for loss of primary patency: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.02-1.69). EVT was associated with significantly lower rates of early complications (6.8% vs 22.6%; P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (3.1 ± 4.2 days vs 7.4 ± 4.9 days; P < 0.001).ConclusionsThese findings further support the efficacy and safety of EVT as an alternative to BSx in patients with symptomatic femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease.     

Cierre de orejuela izquierda en pacientes mayores de 85 años: seguridad y eficacia del registro EWOLUTION

Introduction and objectivesElderly patients with atrial fibrillation are at greater risk of both cardioembolic events and major bleeding than younger patients. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) could be an attractive alternative for these patients, but there are limited data on outcomes with LAAO in patients ≥ 85 years old. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety and efficacy of LAAO in patients ≥ 85 years old.MethodsA total of 1025 patients included in the EWOLUTION registry who underwent LAAO were analyzed and 84 patients ≥ 85 years old were identified and compared with the younger cohort.ResultsPatients ≥ 85 years old had higher estimated stroke and hemorrhagic risks than younger patients (CHA₂DS₂-VASc: 5.2 ± 1.2 vs 4.4 ± 1.6, P < .0001; HAS-BLED: 2.7 ± 1.1 vs 2.3 ± 1.2; P = .003; ≥ 85 years vs < 85 years). Procedural success was high and similar in both groups (98.8% vs 98.5%; P = .99). There were no differences in 7-day device- or procedure-related adverse event rates (2.6% in ≥ 85 years vs 3.1% in < 85 years; P = .80). Despite the higher baseline stroke risk, there was no difference at follow-up between the groups in the annualized stroke rate (0.8/100 patient-years in ≥ 85 years vs 1.3/100 patient-years in < 85 years; P = .649).ConclusionsLAAO in patients ≥ 85 years is safe and effective even though these patients are at high risk for embolic and hemorrhagic events. LAAO may be a reasonable alternative to oral anticoagulation in these patients.     

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.     

Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Anatomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) versus tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis.BackgroundAt present, limited observational data exist supporting TAVR in the context of bicuspid anatomy.MethodsPrimary endpoints were 1-year survival and device success. Secondary endpoints included moderate to severe paravalvular leak (PVL) and a composite endpoint of periprocedural complications; incidence rates of individual procedural endpoints were also explored individually.ResultsIn the main analysis, 17 studies and 181,433 patients undergoing TAVR were included, of whom 6,669 (0.27%) had BAV. A secondary analysis of 7,071 matched subjects with similar baseline characteristics was also performed. Device success and 1-year survival rates were similar between subjects with BAV and those with TAV (97% vs 94% [P = 0.55] and 91.3% vs 90.8% [P = 0.22], respectively). In patients with BAV, a trend toward a higher risk for periprocedural complications was observed in our main analysis (risk ratio [RR]: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.99-1.27; P = 0.07) but not in the matched population secondary analysis (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.81-1.24; P = 0.99). The risk for moderate to severe PVL was higher in subjects with BAV (RR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.29-1.58; P < 0.0001) as well as the incidence of cerebral ischemic events (2.4% vs 1.6%; P = 0.015) and of annular rupture (0.3% vs 0.02%; P = 0.014) in matched subjects.ConclusionsTAVR is a feasible option among selected patients with BAV anatomy, but the higher rates of moderate to severe PVL, annular rupture, and cerebral ischemic events observed in the BAV group warrant caution and further evidence.     

Sex Difference in Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis

BackgroundIt is unknown whether the sex difference whereby female transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates had a lower risk profile, a higher incidence of in-hospital complications, but more favorable short- and long-term survival observed in tricuspid cohorts undergoing TAVR would persist in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs).ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to reexamine the impact of sex on outcomes following TAVR in patients with BAVs.MethodsIn this single-center study, patients with BAVs undergoing TAVR for severe aortic stenosis from 2012 to 2021 were retrospectively included. Baseline characteristics, aortic root anatomy, and in-hospital and 1-year valve hemodynamic status and survival were compared between sexes.ResultsA total of 510 patients with BAVs were included. At baseline, women presented with fewer comorbidities. Men had a greater proportion of Sievers type 1 BAV, higher calcium volumes (549.2 ± 408.4 mm³ vs 920.8 ± 654.3 mm³; P < 0.001), and larger aortic root structures. Women experienced more vascular complications (12.9% vs 4.9%; P = 0.002) and bleeding (11.1% vs 5.3%; P = 0.019) and higher residual gradients (16.9 ± 7.7 mm Hg vs 13.2 ± 6.4 mm Hg; P < 0.001), while men were more likely to undergo second valve implantations during index TAVR (6.3% vs 15.9%; P = 0.001). Death at 1 year was not significantly different between sexes (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.56-2.35; P = 0.70). Bleeding (adjusted HR: 4.62; 95% CI: 1.51-14.12; P = 0.007) was the single independent predictor of 1-year death for women.ConclusionsIn patients with BAVs undergoing TAVR, women presented with fewer comorbidities, while men had a greater proportion of type 1 BAV, more calcification, and larger aortic roots. In-hospital outcomes favored men, with fewer complications except for the need for second valve implantation, but 1-year survival was comparable between sexes.     

Comparative Analysis of Patient Characteristics in Cardiogenic Shock Studies: Differences Between Trials and Registries

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the differences in cardiogenic shock patient characteristics in trial patients and real-life patients.BackgroundCardiogenic shock (CS) is a leading cause of mortality in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, the enrollment of patients into clinical trials is challenging and may not be representative of real-world patients.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of studies in patients presenting with AMI-related CS and compared patient characteristics of those enrolled into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with those in registries.ResultsWe included 14 RCTs (n = 2,154) and 12 registries (n = 133,617). RCTs included more men (73% vs 67.7%, P < 0.001) compared with registries. Patients enrolled in RCTs had fewer comorbidities, including less hypertension (61.6% vs 65.9%, P < 0.001), dyslipidemia (36.4% vs 53.6%, P < 0.001), a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (7.1% vs 10.7%, P < 0.001), and prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (5.4% vs 7.5%, P < 0.001). Patients enrolled in RCTs also had lower lactate levels (4.7 ± 2.3 mmol/L vs 5.9 ± 1.9 mmol/L, P < 0.001) and higher mean arterial pressure (73.0 ± 8.8 mm Hg vs 62.5 ± 12.2 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention (97.5% vs 58.4%, P < 0.001) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (11.6% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001) were used more often in RCTs. The in-hospital mortality (23.9% vs 38.4%, P < 0.001) and 30-day mortality (39.9% vs 45.9%, P < 0.001) were lower in RCT patients.ConclusionsRCTs in AMI-related CS tend to enroll fewer women and lower-risk patients compared with registries. Patients enrolled in RCTs are more likely to receive aggressive treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and have lower in-hospital and 30-day mortality.     

Distal vs Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BackgroundEmerging evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing distal radial access (DRA) with conventional radial access (RA) is available.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects of DRA) vs conventional RA for coronary angiography with or without intervention.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for RCT comparing DRA vs conventional RA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was radial artery occlusion (RAO) at the longest available follow-up.ResultsFourteen studies enrolling 6,208 participants were included. Compared with conventional RA, DRA was associated with a significant lower risk of RAO, either detected at latest follow-up (risk ratio [RR]: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.23-0.56; P < 0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30) or in-hospital (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.19-0.53; P < 0.001; NNT = 28), as well as EASY (Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries) ≥II hematoma (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96; P = 0.04; NNT = 107). By contrast, DRA was associated with a higher risk of access site crossover (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 1.88-5.06; P < 0.001; NNT = 12), a longer time for radial puncture (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 3.56; 95% CI: 0.96-6.16; P < 0.001), a longer time for sheath insertion (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.58; P < 0.001), and a higher number of puncture attempts (SMD: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.48-0.69; P < 0.001).ConclusionsCompared with conventional RA, DRA is associated with lower risks of RAO and EASY ≥II hematoma but requires longer time for radial artery cannulation and sheath insertion, more puncture attempts, and a higher access site crossover.