Combination of ablation and left atrial appendage closure as "One-stop" procedure in the treatment of atrial fibrillation: Current status and future perspective.

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia, is a major cause of stroke and systemic embolism. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been proved to be noninferior to traditional Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as well as novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which is becoming an important alternative to prevent stroke in non-valvular AF. Catheter-based AF ablation (CA) is recommended to be a standard of care in patients with AF refractory to drug therapy due to a better rhythm control and improvement of life quality than antiarrhythmic drugs. Theoretically, the one-stop combination with LAAC and CA tends to bring more benefits in patients with AF, as it not only relieves symptoms, but also reduces the risk of stroke significantly. However, several important questions still need to be considered in the combination procedure although quite a few attempts have already been made in clinical practice. This review provides a comprehensive update on the concept, technique, perioperative management, benefits and other critical issues of the "one-stop" procedure.

Risk of device-related thrombosis following short-term oral anticoagulation with low-dose dabigatran versus warfarin after Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides an alternative for poor candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). To prevent device-related thrombosis (DRT), OAC should be continued for the first 45 days to allow complete endothelialization post-LAAO implantation. Whereas, evidence is limited on the feasibility and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) used after LAAO. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational single-center study of AF patients undergoing LAAO with a Watchman device and receiving either low-dose dabigatran (110mg twice daily) or warfarin in the peri- and post-procedural period for 45 days. Transesophageal echocardiography was scheduled to perform at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after the procedure to assess the stability of the device and to detect DRT. Incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events were also evaluated during the follow-up period. RESULTS: There were a total of 84 patients who successfully underwent Watchman implantation, with 38 patients (45.2%) receiving low-dose dabigatran and 46 patients (54.8%) using warfarin post-LAAO. Peri-procedural complications occurred in 10 patients, with 3 patients in the dabigatran group and 7 patients in the warfarin group (7.9% vs. 15.2%, p = 0.30). During the 12-month follow-up, 1 patient experienced major bleeding and 16 patients suffered minor bleeding in the warfarin group, while 5 patients treated with dabigatran had minor bleeding (34.8% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.02). Besides, 6 DRT (15.8%) were detected in dabigatran groups, and the incidence was higher than in the warfarin group (15.8% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.03). No DRT-related ischemic events were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that short-term low-dose dabigatran (110 mg twice daily) could significantly decrease the risk of bleeding compared with warfarin at the expense of increased risk of DRT post-LAAO. Therefore, low-dose dabigatran should be used with caution for post-implant anticoagulation of LAAO. Further studies are urgently needed on the feasibility and safety of DOACs post-LAAO.

Initial anticoagulation experience with standard-dose rivaroxaban after Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is now recommended as the standard anti-thrombotic regimen to allow complete endothelialization over the Watchman device post percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). However, the need for frequent monitoring, narrow therapeutic range, dietary restrictions and multiple drug interactions associated with warfarin have contributed to increasing uptake of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) worldwide. At present, the feasibility and safety of NOACs instead of warfarin post-LAAO is lacking. METHODS: Patients who underwent successful Watchman device implantation between October 1, 2016 and September 30, 2017 were enrolled in a retrospective database. And only patients who received rivaroxaban in the periprocedural period were included in this study. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) follow-up was scheduled at 6 weeks, at 6 months, and at 12 months post-implantation to detect device-related thrombosis (DRT) or peri-device leak. Meanwhile, thromboembolic and bleeding events were also evaluated at the time of follow-up. RESULTS: Totally, 57 Watchman devices were successfully implanted and 10 patients who were allocated to rivaroxaban at the dosage of 20 mg once daily were included. During the follow-up, none of the patients using rivaroxaban experienced DRT, peri-device leak, thromboembolic complications and major bleeding events, except for 2 patients who suffered minor bleeding during the 6 weeks follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that a short course of standard-dose rivaroxaban following Watchman LAAO is associated with low incidence of thrombotic complications and bleeding events, and might be a feasible alternative regimen in Chinese. Further randomized trials and large sample of real-world studies are needed to validate our finding.