Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: Effect of device positioning on outcome.

OBJECTIVE: The study in patients with percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion investigates clinical outcomes according to the position of the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP) disc. BACKGROUND: The ACP consists of a disc and an anchoring lobe. The disc is meant to cover the ostium of the LAA, but frequently retracts partially or completely into the neck of the LAA. It is not known whether a retracted disc affects outcome. METHODS: Outcomes of 169 consecutive patients (age 73.1 ± 10.4 years; 76% male) with successful LAA closure were analyzed according to the position of the ACP disc: group A had complete coverage of the LAA ostium; in group B the disc prolapsed partially or completely into the LAA-neck. Transesophageal echocardiography was performed 1-6 months after ACP implantation. The safety endpoint was the composite of clinically significant pericardial effusion, device embolization, procedure-related stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, or device thrombus. The efficacy endpoint was the composite of death, neurological events (ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, TIA), or systemic embolism during follow-up. RESULTS: Group A comprised 76 patients (age 73.0 ± 9.9 years; 74% male) and group B 93 patients (age 73.3 ± 10.9 years; 79% male). Mean CHA2 DS2 -Vasc score and HASBLED score were 4.2 ± 1.7 (group A 4.3 ± 1.6; group B 4.2 ± 1.8) and 2.9 ± 1.1 (group A 2.9 ± 1.0; group B 3.0 ± 1.2), respectively. Mean follow-up of the study population was 13.0 ± 10.4 months. Overall, the composite safety and efficacy endpoints occurred in 20 (12%) and 6 patients (4%), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups A and B in the occurrence of the safety endpoint (13% vs. 11%, P = 0.64), or the efficacy endpoint (4% vs. 3%, P = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: No evidence for a difference in the occurrence of the safety and efficacy endpoint was found between patients with complete vs. incomplete ACP disc coverage of the LAA ostium. The risk of repositioning attempts in case of incomplete coverage does not seem to be warranted. Current findings need further confirmation in a larger scale clinical trial. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Amplatzer left atrial appendage occlusion through a patent foramen ovale.

OBJECTIVES: To assess feasibility and outcomes of left atrial appendage (LAA) closure when using a patent foramen ovale (PFO) for left atrial access. BACKGROUND: Because of the fear of entering the left atrium too high, using a PFO for left atrial access during LAA occlusion (LAAO) is generally discouraged. We report our single-center experience using a concomitant PFO for LAAO, thereby avoiding transseptal puncture. METHODS: LAAO was performed with local anesthesia and fluoroscopic guidance only (no echocardiography). The Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP) was used in all patients. After LAAO, the PFO was closed at the same sitting, using an Amplatzer occluder through the ACP delivery sheath. Patients were discharged the same or the following day on dual antiplatelet therapy for 1-6 months, at which time a follow-up transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) was performed. RESULTS: In 49 (96%) of 51 patients (35 males, age 70.9 ± 11.9 years), LAAO was successful using the PFO for left atrial access. In one patient, a long tunnel PFO precluded LAAO, which was performed via a more caudal transseptal puncture. In a second patient, a previously inserted ASD occluder precluded LAAO, which was abandoned because of pericardial bleeding. PFO closure was successful in all patients. Follow-up TEE was performed in 43 patients 138 ± 34 days after the procedure. It showed proper sitting of both devices in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Using a PFO for LAAO had a high success rate and could be the default access in all patients with a PFO, potentially reducing procedural complications arising from transseptal puncture.

Amplatzer left atrial appendage occlusion: single center 10-year experience.

OBJECTIVES: To report a 10-year single center experience with Amplatzer devices for left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion. BACKGROUND: Intermediate-term outcome data following LAA occlusion are scarce. METHODS: Short- and intermediate-term outcomes of patients who underwent LAA occlusion were assessed. All procedures were performed under local aesthesia without transesophageal echocardiography. Patients were discharged on acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel for 1-6 months. RESULTS: LAA occlusion was attempted in 152 patients (105 males, age 72 ± 10 years, CHA2 DS2 -Vasc-score 3.4 ± 1.7, HAS-BLED-score 2.4 ± 1.2). Nondedicated devices were used in 32 patients (21%, ND group) and dedicated Amplatzer Cardiac Plugs were used in 120 patients (79%, ACP group). A patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect was used for left atrial access and closed at the end of LAA occlusion in 40 patients. The short-term safety endpoints (procedural complications, bleeds) occurred in 15 (9.8%) and the efficacy endpoints (death, stroke, systemic embolization) in 0 patients. Device embolization occurred more frequently in the ND as compared to the ACP group (5 patients or 12% vs. 2 patients or 2%). Mean intermediate-term follow up of the study population was 32 months (range 1-120). Late deaths occurred in 15 patients (5 cardiovascular, 7 noncardiac, 3 unexplained). Neurologic events occurred in 2, peripheral embolism in 1, and major bleeding in 4 patients. The composite efficacy and safety endpoint occurred in 7% and 12% of patients. CONCLUSION: LAA closure may be a good alternative to oral anticoagulation. This hypothesis needs to be tested in a randomized clinical trial to ensure that all potential biases of this observational study are accounted for.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke despite oral anticoagulation (resistant stroke). Results from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the efficacy of oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy, some patients continue to have a high residual risk and develop a stroke on OAC therapy (resistant stroke [RS]), and there is a lack of evidence on the management of these patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as secondary prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who have experienced a stroke/transient ischemic attack despite OAC treatment. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug multicenter registry on 1047 consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation undergoing LAAO. Patientes with previous stroke on OAC therapy as indication for LAAO were identified and compared with patients with other indications. RESULTS: A total of 115 patients (11%) with RS were identified. The CHA2DS2-VASc and the HAS-BLED score were significantly higher in the RS group (respectively 5.5±1.5 vs 4.3±1.6; P <.001; 3.9±1.3 vs 3.1±1.2; P <.001). No significant differences were observed in periprocedural major safety events (7.8 vs 4.5%; P=.1). With a mean clinical follow-up of 16.2±12.2 months, the observed annual stroke/transient ischemic attack rate for the RS group was 2.6% (65% risk reduction) and the observed annual major bleeding rate was 0% (100% risk reduction). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RS undergoing LAAO showed similar safety outcomes to patients without RS, with a significant reduction in stroke/transient ischemic attack and major bleeding events during follow-up. Adequately powered controlled trials are needed to further investigate the use of LAAO in RS patients.

Patients with intracranial bleeding and atrial fibrillation treated with left atrial appendage occlusion: Results from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug registry.

BACKGROUND: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), intracranial bleeding (ICB) constitutes a very challenging situation in which the rate of both ischemic and hemorrhagic events is increased. In these patients, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) might represent a very valid alternative. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the procedural safety and long-term outcome of patients undergoing LAAO therapy due to previous ICB. METHODS: Data from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug multicenter registry on 1047 consecutive patients were analyzed. Patients with previous ICB as indication for LAAO were compared to patients with other indications. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients (18.9%) with previous ICB were identified. The CHA2DS2-VASc score was similar (4.5±1.5 vs. 4.4±1.6, p=0.687) and the HAS-BLED score was higher in patients with previous ICB compared to those without (3.5±1.1 vs. 3.1±1.2, p<0.001). No significant differences in peri-procedural major adverse events were observed (2.5 vs 5.4%, p=0.1). Patients with previous ICB were more frequently on single acetylsalicylic acid therapy after LAAO (42.4% vs. 28.3%; p<0.001). With an average follow-up of 1.3years, the observed annual stroke/TIA rate (procedure and follow-up) for patients with previous ICB was 1.4% (75% relative risk reduction). The observed annual major bleeding rate (procedure and follow-up) for patients with previous ICB was 0.7% (89% relative risk reduction). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NVAF and previous ICB, LAAO seemed to be a safe procedure and was associated with a significant reduction in stroke/TIA and a remarkably low frequency of major bleeding during follow-up.

Incidence and Clinical Impact of Device-Associated Thrombus and Peri-Device Leak Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure With the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug.

OBJECTIVES: Routine device surveillance after successful left atrial appendage closure is recommended to evaluate for intermediate to late complications. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and clinical impact of these complications on cardiovascular events. METHODS: Centers participating in the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug multicenter study were requested to submit their post-procedural transesophageal echocardiograms for independent adjudication. Thirteen of 22 centers contributed all their post-procedural echocardiograms, which included 344 from 605 consecutive patients. These images were submitted to a core laboratory and reviewed by 2 independent experts for peri-device leak, device-associated thrombus, device embolization, device migration, left atrial appendage thrombus, and left atrial thrombus. Clinical events were prospectively collected by each center. RESULTS: Of the 344 transesophageal echocardiograms, 339 were deemed analyzable. Patients' mean age was 74.4 ± 7.5 years, and 67.3% were men. The mean CHADS2 score was 2.7 ± 1.3, the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.0 ± 1.2. Amplatzer Cardiac Plug implantation was successful in all patients. Periprocedural major adverse events occurred in 2.4%. Median clinical follow-up duration was 355 days (range 179 to 622 days). Follow-up transesophageal echocardiography was performed after a median of 134 days (range 88 to 227 days). Device-associated thrombus was observed in 3.2% and peri-device leak in 12.5% (5.5% minimal, 5.8% mild, 0.6% moderate, 0.6% severe). Neither device-associated thrombus nor peri-device leak was associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular events. Independent predictors of device-associated thrombus were smoking (odds ratio: 5.79; p = 0.017) and female sex (odds ratio: 4.22; p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Following successful left atrial appendage closure with the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug, the presence of peri-device leak was relatively low, and device-associated thrombus was infrequent. Neither was associated with increased risk for thromboembolism.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Major Gastrointestinal Bleeding (from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug Multicenter Registry).

History of major gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding may represent a frequent clinical indication for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aims to investigate the procedural safety and long-term outcome of patients with previous major GI bleeding (MGIB) who underwent LAAO. Data from the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug multicenter registry on 1,047 patients were analyzed. Patients with previous MGIB as indication for LAAO were compared with patients without previous MGIB. A total of 151 patients (14.4%) with previous MGIB were identified. Periprocedural major bleeding events were more frequent in patients with previous MGIB (4.0% vs 0.8%, p = 0.001). With an average follow-up of 1.3 years, the observed annual rate of stroke/transient ischemic attack and major bleeding for patients with previous MGIB were 2.1% (61.4% relative reduction according to the Congestive Heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 (doubled), Diabetes, Stroke (doubled), Vascular disease, Age 65-74, and Sex (female) [CHA2DS2-VASc] score) and 4.6% (20.1% relative reduction according to the expected rate based on the Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function (1 point each), Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly (>65 years), Drugs/alcohol concomitantly (1 point each) [HAS-BLED] score), respectively. In conclusion, in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and previous MGIB, LAAO was associated with a low annual rate of stroke/transient ischemic attack. Periprocedural major bleeding events were more frequent in this specific population although the annual major bleeding rate showed a 20.1% relative risk reduction according to the HAS-BLED score.

"One-Stop Shop": Safety of Combining Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of combining transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) and left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) versus TAVR alone. BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation undergoing TAVR are at increased risk for stroke and bleeding complications. METHODS: A cohort of 52 patients undergoing concomitant TAVR and LAAO were compared with 52 patients undergoing isolated TAVR. A primary safety endpoint at 30 days, a clinical efficacy endpoint from day 30 to last follow-up, and an LAAO efficacy endpoint from the first post-interventional day to the last follow-up were chosen. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 85 ± 5 years. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score and HAS-BLED score were 3.9 ± 1.1 and 2.6 ± 0.9, respectively. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 7.8 ± 5.5. The median follow-up duration of the study population was 9.4 months (range 0 to 48 months). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 10 patients in the concomitant group and in 7 patients in the isolated TAVR group (19% vs. 14%; 95% confidence interval: 0.59 to 4.06). The clinical and LAAO efficacy endpoints were achieved in 81 (79%) (75% vs. 82%; 95% confidence interval: 0.49 to 2.92) and 75 (73%) patients (69% vs. 76%; 95% confidence interval: 0.54 to 2.51), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study shows that concomitant TAVR and LAAO is feasible and seems to be safe among patients with severe aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation. Larger trials and longer follow-up are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of such an approach.

Predictors of Early (1-Week) Outcomes Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure With Amplatzer Devices.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess predictors of adverse 1-week outcomes and determine the effect of left atrial appendage (LAA) morphology following LAA closure (LAAC) with Amplatzer devices. BACKGROUND: Percutaneous LAAC is a valuable treatment option for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Determinants of procedural safety events with Amplatzer occluders are not well established, and the possibly interrelating effect of LAA anatomy is unknown. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2014, 500 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation ineligible or at high risk for oral anticoagulation underwent LAAC using Amplatzer devices. Procedure- and device-related major adverse events (MAEs) were defined as the composite of death, stroke, major or life-threatening bleeding, serious pericardial effusion, device embolization, major access-site vascular complication, or need for cardiovascular surgery within 7 days following the intervention. RESULTS: Patients (mean age 73.9 ± 10.1 years) were treated with Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (n = 408 [82%]) or Amulet (n = 92 [18%]) devices. Early procedural success was 97.8%, and MAEs occurred in 29 patients (5.8%). Independent predictors of MAEs included device repositioning (odds ratio: 9.13; 95% confidence interval: 2.85 to 33.54; p < 0.001) and left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (odds ratio: 4.08; 95% confidence interval: 1.49 to 11.20; p = 0.006), with no effect of device type or size. Angiographic LAA morphology, characterized as cauliflower (33%), cactus (32%), windsock (20%), or chicken wing (15%), was not associated with procedural success (p = 0.51) or the occurrence of MAEs (p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: In this nonrandomized study, procedural success of LAAC using Amplatzer devices was high. MAEs within 7 days were predicted by patient- and procedure-related factors. Although LAA morphology displayed substantial heterogeneity, outcomes were comparable across the spectrum of LAA anatomies.

Characterization of Cerebrovascular Events After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.

Cardioembolic strokes are generally more lethal and disabling than other source of strokes. Data from PROTECT AF (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology for Embolic Protection in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) suggest that strokes after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with the Watchman device are less disabling than those in the warfarin group. No data assessing the severity of strokes after LAAO with the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug (ACP) are available. The objective of the study was to evaluate the severity of cerebrovascular events after LAAO with the ACP in a population mostly characterized by an absolute or relative contraindication to oral anticoagulation. Data from the ACP multicenter registry were analyzed. Disabling strokes were defined as those with a modified Rankin score of 3 to 6 at 90 days after the event. A total of 1,047 subjects were included. The mean age and CHADS2 score were 75 ± 8 years and 2.8 ± 1.3, respectively. Procedural success was achieved in 97.3% and 4.9% of the patients presented procedural major adverse events. Clinical follow-up was complete in 98.2% of patients with a median of 13 months. There were 9 strokes (0.9%), 9 transient ischemic attacks (0.9%), and no intracranial hemorrhages (0%) at follow-up. After excluding 2 patients with pre-LAAO disability, functional assessment showed disabling events in 3 (19%) of the remaining 16 patients. The median time of presentation was 420 days (interquartile range 234 to 671) after LAAO, and 17 patients (94%) were on single-antiplatelet therapy when the event occurred. According to our results, cerebrovascular events after LAAO with the ACP system were infrequent and mostly nondisabling.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients Aged <75 to ≥ 75 Years.

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is emerging as a promising alternative to oral anticoagulation. Because aged patients present a greater risk of not only cardioembolic events but also major bleeding, LAAO might represent a valid alternative as this would allow oral anticoagulation cessation while keeping cardioembolic protection. The objective of the study was to explore the safety and efficacy of LAAO in elderly patients. Data from the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug multicenter registry were analyzed. The cohort was categorized in 2 groups (<75 vs ≥ 75 years). A total of 1,053 subjects were included in the registry. Of them, 219 were excluded because of combined procedures. As a result, 828 subjects were included (54.6% ≥ 75 years). Procedural success was high and similar in both groups (97.3%). Acute procedural major adverse events were not statistically different among groups (3.2% in <75 years vs 5.1%; p = 0.17) although stratified analysis showed a higher incidence of cardiac tamponade in elderly patients (0.5% vs 2.2%; p = 0.04). With a median follow-up of 16.8 months, no significant differences in stroke/TIA (1.9% vs 2.3%; p = 0.89) and major bleeding (1.7% vs 2.6%; p = 0.54) were observed. In conclusion, LAAO was associated with similar procedural success in patients aged <75 and ≥ 75 years although older patients had a higher incidence of cardiac tamponade. At follow-up, stroke and major bleeding rates were similar among groups.

Impact of chronic kidney disease on left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) using the Amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP) is a preventive treatment of atrial fibrillation related thromboembolism. AIM: To assess the safety and efficacy of LAAO in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: Among the ACP multicentre registry, 1014 patients (75±8yrs) with available renal function were included. RESULTS: Patients with CKD (N=375, CHA2DS2-VASc: 4.9±1.5, HASBLED: 3.4±1.3) were at higher risk than patients without CKD (N=639, CHA2DS2-VASc: 4.2±1.6, HASBLED: 2.9±1.2; p<0.001 for both). Procedural (97%) and occlusion (99%) success were similarly high in all stages of CKD. Peri-procedural major adverse events (MAE) were observed in 5.1% of patients, 0.8% of death, with no difference between patients with and those without CKD (6.1 vs 4.5%, p=0.47). In patients with complete follow-up (1319 patients years), the annual stroke+transient ischaemic attack (TIA) rate was 2.3% and the observed bleeding rate was 2.1% (62 and 60% less than expected, similarly among patients with and those without CKD). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a lower overall survival (84 vs 96% and 84 vs 93% at 1 and 2yrs. respectively; p<0.001) among patients with an eGFR <30ml/min/1.73m(2). CONCLUSION: LAAO using the ACP has a similar procedural safety among CKD patients compared to patients with normal renal function. LAAO with ACP offers a dramatic reduction of stroke+TIA rate and of bleeding rate persistent in all stages of CKD, as compared to the expected annual risk.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: multicentre experience with the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug.

AIMS: To investigate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug (ACP) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from consecutive patients treated in 22 centres were collected. A total of 1,047 patients were included in the study. Procedural success was 97.3%. There were 52 (4.97%) periprocedural major adverse events. Follow-up was complete in 1,001/1,019 (98.2%) of successfully implanted patients (average 13 months, total 1,349 patient-years). One-year all-cause mortality was 4.2%. No death at follow-up was reported as device-related. There were nine strokes (0.9%) and nine transient ischaemic attacks (0.9%) during follow-up. The annual rate of systemic thromboembolism was 2.3% (31/1,349 patient-years), which is a 59% risk reduction. There were 15 major bleedings (1.5%) during follow-up. The annual rate of major bleeding was 2.1% (28/1,349 patient-years), which is a 61% risk reduction. Patients with single LAAO on aspirin monotherapy or no therapy and longer follow-up had fewer cerebral and fewer bleeding events. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicentre study, LAAO with the ACP showed high procedural success and a favourable outcome for the prevention of AF-related thromboembolism. Modification in antithrombotic therapy after LAAO may result in reduction of bleeding events.

Early results of first versus second generation Amplatzer occluders for left atrial appendage closure in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion has been proven to be an effective treatment for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation. For this purpose, the Amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP) was introduced. Its second generation, the Amulet, was developed for easier delivery, better coverage, and reduction of complications. AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of first generation versus second generation Amplatzer occluders for LAA occlusion. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the LAA occlusion registries of the Bern and Zurich university hospitals. Comparison of the last consecutive 50 ACP cases versus the first consecutive 50 Amulet cases in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. For safety, a periprocedural combined endpoint, which is composed of death, stroke, cardiac tamponade, and bailout by surgery was predefined. For efficacy, the endpoint was procedural success. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics. The percentage of associated interventions during LAA occlusion was high in (78% with ACP vs. 70% with Amulet p = ns). Procedural success was similar in both groups (98 vs. 94%, p = 0.61). The combined safety endpoint for severe adverse events was reached by a similar rate of patients in both groups (6 vs. 8%, p = 0.7). Overall complication rate was insignificantly higher in the ACP group, which was mainly driven by clinically irrelevant pericardial effusions (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.31). Death, stroke, or tamponade were similar between the groups (0 vs. 2%, 0 vs. 0%, or 6 vs. 6%, p = ns). CONCLUSION: Transcatheter LAA occlusion for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation can be performed with similarly high success rates with first and second generations of Amplatzer occluders. According to this early experience, the Amulet has failed to improve results of LAA occlusion. The risk for major procedural adverse events is acceptable but has to be taken into account when selecting patients for LAA occlusion, a preventive procedure.

Feasibility and outcomes of combined transcatheter aortic valve replacement with other structural heart interventions in a single session: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent cardiac diseases are frequent among elderly patients and invite simultaneous treatment to ensure an overall favourable patient outcome. AIM: To investigate the feasibility of combined single-session percutaneous cardiac interventions in the era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: This prospective, case-control study included 10 consecutive patients treated with TAVI, left atrial appendage occlusion and percutaneous coronary interventions. Some in addition had patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect closure in the same session. The patients were matched in a 1:10 manner with TAVI-only cases treated within the same time period at the same institution regarding their baseline factors. The outcome was validated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria. RESULTS: Procedural time (126±42 vs 83±40 min, p=0.0016), radiation time (34±8 vs 22±12 min, p=0.0001) and contrast dye (397±89 vs 250±105 mL, p<0.0001) were higher in the combined intervention group than in the TAVI-only group. Despite these drawbacks, no difference in the VARC endpoints was evident during the in-hospital period and after 30 days (VARC combined safety endpoint 32% for TAVI only and 20% for combined intervention, p=1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter treatment of combined cardiac diseases is feasible even in a single session in a high-volume centre with experienced operators.