Quality and transparency of evidence for implantable cardiovascular medical devices assessed by the CORE-MD consortium.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The European Union Medical Device Regulation 2017/745 challenges key stakeholders to follow transparent and rigorous approaches to the clinical evaluation of medical devices. The purpose of this study is a systematic evaluation of published clinical evidence underlying selected high-risk cardiovascular medical devices before and after market access in the European Union (CE-marking) between 2000 and 2021. METHODS: Pre-specified strategies were applied to identify published studies of prospective design evaluating 71 high-risk cardiovascular devices in seven different classes (bioresorbable coronary scaffolds, left atrial appendage occlusion devices, transcatheter aortic valve implantation systems, transcatheter mitral valve repair/replacement systems, surgical aortic and mitral heart valves, leadless pacemakers, subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator). The search time span covered 20 years (2000-21). Details of study design, patient population, intervention(s), and primary outcome(s) were summarized and assessed with respect to timing of the corresponding CE-mark approval. RESULTS: At least one prospective clinical trial was identified for 70% (50/71) of the pre-specified devices. Overall, 473 reports of 308 prospectively designed studies (enrolling 97 886 individuals) were deemed eligible, including 81% (251/308) prospective non-randomized clinical trials (66 186 individuals) and 19% (57/308) randomized clinical trials (31 700 individuals). Pre-registration of the study protocol was available in 49% (150/308) studies, and 16% (48/308) had a peer-reviewed publicly available protocol. Device-related adverse events were evaluated in 82% (253/308) of studies. An outcome adjudication process was reported in 39% (120/308) of the studies. Sample size was larger for randomized in comparison to non-randomized trials (median of 304 vs. 100 individuals, P < .001). No randomized clinical trial published before CE-mark approval for any of the devices was identified. Non-randomized clinical trials were predominantly published after the corresponding CE-mark approval of the device under evaluation (89%, 224/251). Sample sizes were smaller for studies published before (median of 31 individuals) than after (median of 135 individuals) CE-mark approval (P < .001). Clinical trials with larger sample sizes (>50 individuals) and those with longer recruitment periods were more likely to be published after CE-mark approval, and were more frequent during the period 2016-21. CONCLUSIONS: The quantity and quality of publicly available data from prospective clinical investigations across selected categories of cardiovascular devices, before and after CE approval during the period 2000-21, were deemed insufficient. The majority of studies was non-randomized, with increased risk of bias, and performed in small populations without provision of power calculations, and none of the reviewed devices had randomized trial results published prior to CE-mark certification.

Feasibility Study on Atrial Fibrillation Ablation with Pulsed Field Ablation and concomitant Occlusion of the Left Atrial Appendage.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) are increasingly performed as individual procedures. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has significantly reduced procedure duration and may be advantageous for the combined approach. METHODS: We have launched a program for simultaneous AF ablation using PFA and LAAO for patients qualifying for both treatments and excluding those with complex anatomy. We compare procedure duration and fluoroscopy time against individual procedures (either AF ablation or LAAO alone), all performed by the same operators and using consistent technologies. RESULTS: We performed the combined procedure in 10 patients (50% male; median age 70 years) and excluded two patients (17%) because of complex LAA anatomy. No death, stroke or major bleeding, including pericardial effusion, occurred. For single procedure comparison, 207 AF ablation procedures and 61 LAAO procedures were available. Total median procedure duration was 79 minutes (range 60; 125) for the combined procedure, 71 minutes (25; 241) for individual AF ablation (51 minutes without and 78 minutes with 3D electroanatomic mapping) and 47 minutes (15; 162) for individual LAAO. Respective fluoroscopy times were 21 (15; 26), 15 (5; 44) and 10 (3; 50) minutes. For the combined procedure, femoral vein access to last PFA application lasted 49 minutes (34; 93) and LAAO added 20 minutes (15; 37). CONCLUSION: Simultaneous PFA-based AF ablation and LAAO in carefully selected patients is feasible, safe, and can be executed within a short overall procedure duration.

Amulet or Watchman Device for Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Primary Results of the SWISS-APERO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: No study has so far compared Amulet with the new Watchman FLX in terms of residual left atrial appendage (LAA) patency or clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous LAA closure. METHODS: In the investigator-initiated SWISS APERO trial (Comparison of Amulet Versus Watchman/FLX Device in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure), patients undergoing LAA closure were randomly assigned (1:1) open label to receive Amulet or Watchman 2.5 or FLX (Watchman) across 8 European centers. The primary end point was the composite of justified crossover to a nonrandomized device during LAA closure procedure or residual LAA patency detected by cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at 45 days. The secondary end points included procedural complications, device-related thrombus, peridevice leak at transesophageal echocardiography, and clinical outcomes at 45 days. RESULTS: Between June 2018 and May 2021, 221 patients were randomly assigned to Amulet (111 [50.2%]) or Watchman (110 [49.8%]), of whom 25 (22.7%) patients included before October 2019 received Watchman 2.5, and 85 (77.3%) patients received Watchman FLX. The primary end point was assessable in 205 (92.8%) patients and occurred in 71 (67.6%) patients receiving Amulet and 70 (70.0%) patients receiving Watchman, respectively (risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.80-1.16]; P=0.713). A single justified crossover occurred in a patient with Amulet who fulfilled LAA patency criteria at 45-day CCTA. Major procedure-related complications occurred more frequently in the Amulet group (9.0% versus 2.7%; P=0.047) because of more frequent bleeding (7.2% versus 1.8%). At 45 days, the peridevice leak rate at transesophageal echocardiography was higher with Watchman than with Amulet (27.5% versus 13.7%, P=0.020), albeit none was major (ie, >5 mm), whereas device-related thrombus was detected in 1 (0.9%) patient with Amulet and 3 (3.0%) patients with Watchman at CCTA and in 2 (2.1%) and 5 (5.5%) patients at transesophageal echocardiography, respectively. Clinical outcomes at 45 days did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Amulet was not associated with a lower rate of the composite of crossover or residual LAA patency compared with Watchman at 45-day CCTA. Amulet, however, was associated with lower peridevice leak rates at transesophageal echocardiography, higher procedural complications, and similar clinical outcomes at 45 days compared with Watchman. The clinical relevance of CCTA-detected LAA patency requires further investigation. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03399851.

Watchman FLX vs. Watchman 2.5 in a Dual-Center Left Atrial Appendage Closure Cohort: the WATCH-DUAL study.

AIMS: No studies have compared Watchman 2.5 (W2.5) with Watchman FLX (FLX) devices to date. We aimed at comparing the FLX with W2.5 devices with respect to clinical outcomes, left atrial appendage (LAA) sealing properties and device-related thrombus (DRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures performed at two European centres between November 2017 and February 2021 were included. Procedure-related complications and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) at 6 months after LAAC were recorded. At 45-day computed tomography (CT) follow-up, intra- (IDL) and peri- (PDL) device leak, residual patent neck area (RPNA), and DRT were assessed by a Corelab. Out of 144 LAAC consecutive procedures, 71 and 73 interventions were performed using W2.5 and FLX devices, respectively. There were no differences in terms of procedure-related complications (4.2% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.626). At 45-day CT, the FLX was associated with lower frequency of IDL [21.3% vs. 40.0%; P = 0.032; odds ratio (OR): 0.375; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.160-0.876; P = 0.024], similar rate of PDL (29.5% vs. 42.0%; P = 0.170), and smaller RPNA [6 (0-36) vs. 40 (6-115) mm2; P = 0.001; OR: 0.240; 95% CI: 0.100-0.577; P = 0.001] compared with the W2.5 group. At 45 days, rate of DRT as detected by CT and/or transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE), was higher with W2.5 (6.0% vs. 0%, P = 0.045). At 6-month follow-up, NACE did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of consecutive LAACs, FLX as compared to W2.5, was associated with similar procedure-related complications and 6-month NACE, but with improved LAA neck coverage, and lower IDL and DRT.

Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure: Single versus combined procedures.

OBJECTIVES: This study compares procedural and late clinical outcomes of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with Amplatzer devices as a single versus a combined procedure with other structural or coronary interventions. BACKGROUND: Multiple cardiac conditions are frequent among elderly patients and invite simultaneous treatment to ensure a favorable patient outcomes. METHODS: 559 consecutive patients (73.3 ± 11.1 years) underwent LAAC with Amplatzer devices at two centres (Bern and Zurich university hospitals, Switzerland) either as a single procedure or combined with other interventions. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of major peri-procedural complications and major bleeding at follow-up, the primary efficacy endpoint included stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular/unexplained death. All event rates are reported per 100 patient-years. RESULTS: In 263 single and 296 combined procedures with percutaneous coronary interventions (47.6%), closure of an atrial septal defect (8.4%) or a patent foramen ovale (36.5%), transcatheter aortic valve implantation (10.1%), mitral clipping (4.1%), atrial fibrillation ablation (8.8%), or another procedure (3.0%) were analyzed. Device success (96.6% [single] vs. 99.0% [combined], p = .08) did not differ between the groups. After a mean follow-up of 2.6 ± 1.5 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5 years and a total of 1,422 patient-years, the primary efficacy (40/677, 5.9% [single] vs. 37/745, 5.0% [combined]; HR, 1.2, 95% CI, 0.8-1.9, p = .44), as well as the primary safety endpoint (25/677, 3.7% vs 28/745, 3.8%; HR, 1.0, 95% CI, 0.6-1.8, p = .89) were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: LAAC with Amplatzer devices combined with structural, coronary, and electrophysiological procedures offers procedural feasibility and safety, as well as long-term efficacy.

Impact of individual stroke risk on outcome after Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure in patients with atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate periprocedural and long-term outcome of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) using Amplatzer occluders with respect to individual pre-procedural stroke risk. BACKGROUND: LAAC is a proven strategy for prevention from stroke and bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation not amenable to oral anticoagulation. Whether individual pre-procedural stroke risk may affect procedural and long-term clinical outcome after LAAC is unclear. METHODS: Multicenter study of consecutive patients who underwent Amplatzer-LAAC. Using pre-procedural CHADS2 score, outcomes were compared between a low (0-2 points) and a high stroke risk group (3-6 points). RESULTS: Five hundred consecutive patients (73.9 ± 10.1 years) who underwent Amplatzer-LAAC. Two hundred and forty eight had preprocedural CHADS2 score ≤ 2 points (low-risk group) and the remaining 252 patients had 3-6 points (high-risk group). Periprocedural complication rates (6.0% vs. 5.6%, p = .85), procedural success (LAAC without major periprocedural or device-related complications or major para-device leaks: 89.4% vs. 87.9%, p = .74), and 30-day-mortality (2.4% vs. 2.6%, p = .77) were comparable. After 1,346 patient-years (PY), the long-term composite efficacy endpoint (stroke, systemic embolism, cardiovascular, and unexplained death) was reached in 23/653 (3.5/100 PY) versus 52/693 (7.5/100 PY); HR = 2.13; 95%-CI, 1.28-3.65, p = .002) with stroke rates 67% and 68% lower than anticipated by preprocedural CHADS2 score. Combined safety endpoint (major periprocedural complications and major, life-threatening or fatal bleedings) occurred in 22/653 (3.4/100 PY) versus 28/693 (4.0/100 PY); HR = 1.20; 95%-CI, 0.66-2.20, p = .52). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients at low risk of stroke, LAAC with Amplatzer devices is associated with similar safety and efficacy in high-risk patients in our study.

Validation of high bleeding risk criteria and definition as proposed by the academic research consortium for high bleeding risk.

AIMS: To validate the set of clinical and biochemical criteria proposed by consensus by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) for High Bleeding Risk (HBR) for the identification of HBR patients. These criteria were categorized into major and minor, if expected to carry in isolation, respectively, ≥4% and <4% Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding risk within 1-year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). High bleeding risk patients are those meeting at least 1 major or 2 minor criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients undergoing PCI at Bern University Hospital, between February 2009 and September 2018 were prospectively entered into the Bern PCI Registry (NCT02241291). Age, haemoglobin, platelet count, creatinine, and use of oral anticoagulation were prospectively collected, while the remaining HBR criteria except for planned surgery were retrospectively adjudicated. A total of 16 580 participants with complete ARC-HBR criteria were included. After assigning 1 point to each major and 0.5 point to each minor criterion, we observed for every 0.5 score increase a step-wise augmentation of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding rates at 1 year ranging from 1.90% among patients fulfilling no criterion, through 4.01%, 5.98%, 7.42%, 8.60%, 12.21%, 12.29%, and 17.64%. All major and five out of six minor criteria, conferred in isolation a risk for BARC 3 or 5 bleeding at 1 year exceeding 4% at the upper limit of the 95% confidence intervals. CONCLUSION: All major and the majority of minor ARC-HBR criteria identify in isolation patients at HBR.

Infantile Hypertrophic Pyloric Stenosis: An Epidemiological Review.

Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (IHPS) is the most common gastrointestinal disease among infants. IHPS occurs as an isolated condition or together with other congenital anomalies. Association with genetic and environmental factors, bottle feeding, younger maternal age, maternal smoking, and erythromycin administration in the first two weeks of life has been shown. Familial aggregation has been described and a family history is seen in 47.9 percent of siblings. Infants typically present with projectile vomiting associated with symptoms of failure to thrive. An olive-like mass palpable in the right upper abdominal quadrant is being reported less frequently because of earlier diagnosis by ultrasound. IHPS is generally corrected through laparoscopic pyloromyotomy. Endoscopic pyloric balloon dilation is a novel alternative. Further studies on different populations, the general population, and familial segregation to determine the prevalence, influence, and mode of familial aggregation and correlation with environmental factors are needed to determine the etiology of IHPS.

Utility of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in the evaluation of right ventricular (RV) involvement in patients with myocardial infarction (MI).

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to compare the prevalence of right ventricle involvement in a population of patients with myocardial infarction as detected by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), clinical presentation, electrocardiographic (ECG) and echocardiographic criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 97 consecutive patients, admitted to our institution for acute myocardial infarction, underwent a standard CMR examination within 5 days after the event. The presence of myocardial oedema and late enhancement of the right ventricle were compared to infarct location (anterior vs. inferior), clinical data, ECG, echocardiography results and other CMR findings. The results were analysed statistically using the Student's t test for independent samples and the K statistic. RESULTS: Among the 97 patients included in the study, a diagnosis of right ventricular infarction was established in 12, 14 and 24 cases on the basis of the clinical data, the ECG and echocardiography, respectively. CMR demonstrated myocardial oedema and late enhancement of the right ventricle in 48 and 32 cases, respectively. The right ventricle was involved in 46 % of patients with inferior myocardial infarction (15/32) and in 30 % with anterior myocardial infarction (17/56), correlating to a worsening of both right and left ventricular performance (p = 0.001-0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The right ventricle is frequently involved in myocardial infarction, correlating to a worse functional impairment of both ventricles and a worse prognosis. This finding, which is often underestimated by traditional cardiological tests, is well revealed by CMR, with potential clinical and therapeutic impact.

Pericardial Effusion After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Timing, Predictors, and Clinical Impact.

BACKGROUND: Pericardial effusion (PE) is the most common serious left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) complication, but its mechanisms, time course, and prognostic impact are poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the frequency, timing, predictors and clinical impact of PE after LAAC. METHODS: Data on consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous LAAC between 2009 and 2022 were prospectively collected including the 1-year follow-up. Both single (Watchman 2.5/FLX, Boston Scientific) and double (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug or Amulet, St. Jude Medical/Abbott) LAAC devices were used. An imaging core laboratory adjudicated the PEs and categorized them as early (≤7 days) and late (8-365 days). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of early and overall PE. RESULTS: Of 1,023 attempted LAAC procedures, PE was observed in 44 (4.3%) patients; PE was categorized as early in 34 (3.3%) and late in 10 (0.9%) patients. The majority of PEs occurred within 6 hours after LAAC (n = 25, 56.8%) and were clinically relevant (n = 28, 63.6%). Independent predictors of early PE were double-closure left atrial appendage devices (adjusted OR: 8.20; 95% CI: 1.09-61.69), female sex (adjusted OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.50-7.73), the use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) at baseline (adjusted OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.11-6.09), and advanced age (adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.23), whereas female sex and OAC at baseline remained independent predictors of overall PE. CONCLUSIONS: In this large LAAC registry, PE was observed in <1 in 20 patients and usually occurred within 6 hours after procedure. The majority of early PEs were clinically relevant and occurred in the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet procedures. Independent predictors included the use of double-closure devices, female sex, OAC at baseline, and advanced age. (LAAC-registry: Clinical Outcome After Echocardiography-guided LAA-closure; NCT04628078).

Comparison of Mid-Term Prognosis in Intermediate-to-Low-Risk Contemporary Population with Guidelines-Oriented Age Cutoff.

BACKGROUND: Current European guidelines support transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in intermediate-to-low-risk patients ≥75 years-old, but its prognostic relevance is unknown. METHODS: Intermediate-to-low-risk (The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score <8%) patients enrolled in the HORSE registry were included. We compared the populations aged under 75 with those over 75. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2685 patients were included: 280 (8.6%) < 75 and 2405 ≥ 75 years. Through a mean follow-up of 437 ± 381 days, 198 (8.2%) and 23 (8.2%) patients died in the two arms without statistically significant differences (log-rank p = 0.925). At Cox regression analysis, age did not predict the occurrence of all-cause death, neither as a continuous variable (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.04, p = 0.294) nor dichotomizing according to the prespecified cutoff of 75 years (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63-1.51, p = 0.924). Time-to-event ROC curves showed low accuracy of age to predict all-cause mortality (area under the curve of 0.54 for both 1-year and 2-year outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI has comparable benefits across age strata for intermediate-to-low-risk patients. The age cutoff suggested by the current guidelines is not predictive of the risk of adverse events during hospital stays or of all-cause mortality through a mid-term follow-up.

Embolization of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices: Timing, management and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder embolization is an infrequent but serious complication. OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe timing, management and clinical outcomes of device embolization in a multi-center registry. METHODS: Patient characteristics, imaging findings and procedure and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. Device embolizations were categorized according to 1) timing 2) management and 3) clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven centers contributed data. Device embolization occurred in 108 patients. In 70.4 % of cases, it happened within the first 24 h of the procedure. The device was purposefully left in the LA and the aorta in two (1.9 %) patients, an initial percutaneous retrieval was attempted in 81 (75.0 %) and surgery without prior percutaneous retrieval attempt was performed in 23 (21.3 %) patients. Two patients died before a retrieval attempt could be made. In 28/81 (34.6 %) patients with an initial percutaneous retrieval attempt a second, additional attempt was performed, which was associated with a high mortality (death in patients with one attempt: 2.9 % vs. second attempt: 21.4 %, p < 0.001). The primary outcome (bailout surgery, cardiogenic shock, stroke, TIA, and/or death) occurred in 47 (43.5 %) patients. Other major complications related to device embolization occurred in 21 (19.4 %) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of device embolizations after LAA closure occurs early. A percutaneous approach is often the preferred method for a first rescue attempt. Major adverse event rates, including death, are high particularly if the first retrieval attempt was unsuccessful. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: This dedicated multicenter registry examined timing, management, and clinical outcome of device embolization. Early embolization (70.4 %) was most frequent. As a first rescue attempt, percutaneous retrieval was preferred in 75.0 %, followed by surgical removal (21.3 %). In patients with a second retrieval attempt a higher mortality (death first attempt: 2.9 % vs. death second attempt: 24.1 %, p < 0.001) was observed. Mortality (10.2 %) and the major complication rate after device embolization were high.

Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Stroke despite Oral Anticoagulation.

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) experiencing ischemic stroke despite oral anticoagulation (OAC), i.e., breakthrough strokes, are not uncommon, and represent an important clinical subgroup in view of the consistently high risk of stroke recurrence and mortality. The understanding of the heterogenous potential mechanism underlying OAC failure is essential in order to implement specific therapeutic measures aimed at reducing the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke. However, due to the incomplete comprehension of this phenomenon and the limited available data, secondary stroke prevention in such high-risk patients represents a clinical dilemma. There are several available strategies to prevent ischemic stroke recurrence in AF patients with breakthrough stroke in the absence of competing causes unrelated to AF, and these include continuation or change in the type of OAC, addition of antiplatelet therapy, left atrial appendage closure, or any combination of the above options. However, due to the limited available data, the latest guidelines do not provide any specific recommendations about which of the above strategies may be preferred. This review describes the incidence, the clinical impact and the potential mechanisms underlying OAC failure in AF patients. Furthermore, the evidence supporting each of the above therapeutic options for secondary stroke prevention and the potential future directions will be discussed.

Computed Tomography Scan Evidence for Left Atrial Appendage Short-Term Remodeling Following Percutaneous Occlusion: Impact of Device Oversizing.

Background The interrelationships between left atrial appendage (LAA) dimensions and device following implantation are unknown. We aimed to analyze the impact of Watchman device implantation on LAA dimensions following its percutaneous closure and potential predictors of remodeling. Methods and Results All consecutive LAA closure procedures performed at 2 centers between November 2017 and December 2020 were included in the WATCH-DUAL (Watchman 2.5 Versus Watchman FLX in a Dual-Center Left Atrial Appendage Closure Cohort) registry. This study included patients who had pre- and postintervention computed tomography scan analysis. The LAA and device dimensions were measured in a centralized core lab by 3-dimensional computed tomography scan reconstruction methods, focusing on the device landing zone. This analysis included 104 patients (age, 76.0 [range, 72.0-83.0] years; 72% men; 53% Watchman FLX; 47% Watchman 2.5). The baseline characteristics were comparable between Watchman 2.5 and Watchman FLX groups, except for the higher use of oversizing in the latter group. The median delay for computed tomography control was 49 (range, 43-64) days. The landing zone area (median, 446 [range, 363-523] versus 290 [222-366] mm2; P<0.001) and minimal diameter (median, 23.0 [range, 20.7-24.8] versus 16.7 [14.7-19.4] mm; P<0.001) significantly increased after implantation. The absolute (median, 157 [range, 98-220] versus 85 [18-148] mm2, P<0.001) and relative (median, 50% [range, 32%-79%] versus 26% [4%-50%]; P<0.001) increases in landing zone area were more pronounced in patients with oversized device. Baseline LAA dimensions were smaller, landing zone eccentricity larger, and oversized device more frequent in patients with significant overexpansion compared with the others. Conclusions LAA dimensions increased at the site of the Watchman prosthesis after implantation, suggesting a local positive remodeling after the procedure. This phenomenon was more pronounced in the case of oversized devices.

Impact of Preprocedural Computed Tomography on Left Atrial Appendage Closure Success: A Swiss-Apero Trial Subanalysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefit related to the use of preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CCTA) on top of periprocedural echocardiography to plan percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures is still unclear. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the impact of preprocedural CCTA on LAAC procedural success. METHODS: In the investigator-initiated SWISS-APERO (Comparison of Amplatzer Amulet and Watchman Device in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure) trial, patients undergoing echocardiography-guided LAAC were randomly assigned to receive the Amulet (Abbott) or Watchman 2.5/FLX (Boston Scientific) device across 8 European centers. According to the study protocol ongoing at the time of the procedure, the first operators had (CCTA unblinded group) or did not have (CCTA blinded group) access to preprocedural CCTA images. In this post hoc analysis, we compared blinded vs unblinded procedures in terms of procedural success defined as complete left atrial appendage occlusion as evaluated at the end of LAAC (short-term) or at the 45-day follow-up (long-term) without procedural-related complications. RESULTS: Among 219 LAACs preceded by CCTA, 92 (42.1%) and 127 (57.9%) were assigned to the CCTA unblinded and blinded group, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, operator unblinding to preprocedural CCTA remained associated with a higher rate of short-term procedural success (93.5% vs 81.1%; P = 0.009; adjusted OR: 2.76; 95% CI: 1.05-7.29; P = 0.040) and long-term procedural success (83.7% vs 72.4%; P = 0.050; adjusted OR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.03-4.35; P = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective multicenter cohort of clinically indicated echocardiography-guided LAACs, unblinding of the first operators to preprocedural CCTA images was independently associated with a higher rate of both short- and long-term procedural success. Further studies are needed to better evaluate the impact of preprocedural CCTA on clinical outcomes.

Symptomatic vs. non-symptomatic device-related thrombus after LAAC: a sub-analysis from the multicenter EUROC-DRT registry.

BACKGROUND: Device-related thrombus (DRT) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is associated with adverse outcomes, i.e. ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (SE). Data on predictors of stroke/SE in the context of DRT are limited. AIMS: This study aimed to identify predisposing factors for stroke/SE in DRT patients. In addition, the temporal connection of stroke/SE to DRT diagnosis was analyzed. METHODS: The EUROC-DRT registry included 176 patients, in whom DRT after LAAC were diagnosed. Patients with symptomatic DRT, defined as stroke/SE in the context of DRT diagnosis, were compared against patients with non-symptomatic DRT. Baseline characteristics, anti-thrombotic regimens, device position, and timing of stroke/SE were compared. RESULTS: Stroke/SE occurred in 25/176 (14.2%) patients diagnosed with DRT (symptomatic DRT). Stroke/SE occurred after a median of 198 days (IQR 37-558) after LAAC. In 45.8% stroke/SE occurred within one month before/after DRT diagnosis (DRT-related stroke). Patients with symptomatic DRT had lower left ventricular ejection fractions (50.0 ± 9.1% vs. 54.2 ± 11.0%, p = 0.03) and higher rates of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (84.0% vs. 64.9%, p = 0.06). Other baseline parameters and device positions were not different. Most ischemic events occurred among patients with single antiplatelet therapy (50%), however, stroke/SE was also observed under dual antiplatelet therapy (25%) or oral anticoagulation (20%). CONCLUSION: Stroke/SE are documented in 14.2% and occur both in close temporal relation to the DRT finding and chronologically independently therefrom. Identification of risk factors remains cumbersome, putting all DRT patients at substantial risk for stroke/SE. Further studies are necessary to minimize the risk of DRT and ischemic events.

Left atrial appendage closure for thrombus trapping: the international, multicentre TRAPEUR registry.

BACKGROUND: Although the presence of a thrombus contraindicates left atrial appendage closure procedure (LAAC), a previous study reported the feasibility of the thrombus trapping procedure (TTP) technique to overcome this limitation. AIMS: This study aimed to analyse the short-term outcomes in a series of patients who underwent LAAC using the TTP (TTP-LAAC). METHODS: This retrospective series included patients who underwent TTP-LAAC between January 2018 and May 2020 in 13 European centres. Device choice, pre-interventional work-up and post-discharge antithrombotic therapy regimens were left to the discretion of the operators. The primary endpoint was the 30-day occurrence of stroke, systemic embolism or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 1,918 patients underwent LAAC. A thrombus was identified in 71 cases but completely disappeared in 24 patients before procedure. TTP-LAAC was finally performed in 53 cases (3%). Thrombi were identified ahead of the actual day of implantation in 47 patients (87%) and were mostly limited in size (50 cases with extension <50% of the LAA surface). The Amplatzer Amulet and WATCHMAN FLX occluders were implanted in 44 and 9 patients, respectively. A single deployment approach was applied in 70% and a cerebral embolic protection system was used in 9% of the patients. The overall success rate was 100%. Small pericardial effusion without tamponade was observed in 6% of the cases. Patients were discharged with 72% under antiplatelet therapy and 10% under short-term oral anticoagulation. The primary endpoint occurred in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: TTP-LAAC might be used in a minority of LAAC procedures but appears to be feasible and safe in the short-term, in select cases.

Clinical and echocardiographic risk factors for device-related thrombus after left atrial appendage closure: an analysis from the multicenter EUROC-DRT registry.

BACKGROUND: Data on Device-related Thrombus (DRT) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) remain scarce. This study aimed to investigate risk factors for DRT from centers reporting to the EUROC-DRT registry. METHODS: We included 537 patients (112 with DRT and 425 without DRT) who had undergone LAAC between 12/2008 and 04/2019. Baseline and implantation characteristics, anti-thrombotic treatment and clinical outcomes were compared between both groups in uni- and multivariate analyses. Additional propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to focus on the role of implantation characteristics. RESULTS: Patients with DRT showed higher rates of previous stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) (49.1% vs. 34.7%, p < 0.01), spontaneous echocardiographic contrast (SEC) (44.9% vs. 27.7%, p < 0.01) and lower left atrial appendage (LAA) peak emptying velocity (35.4 ± 18.5 vs. 42.4 ± 18.0 cm/s, p = 0.02). Occluders implanted in DRT patients were larger (25.5 ± 3.8 vs. 24.6 ± 3.5 mm, p = 0.03) and implanted deeper in the LAA (mean depth: 7.6 ± 4.7 vs. 5.7 ± 4.7 mm, p < 0.01). Coverage of the appendage ostium was achieved less often in DRT patients (69.5% vs. 81.5%, p < 0.01), while DRT patients were less frequently on oral anticoagulation (7.1% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis identified age, prior stroke/TIA and SEC as independent risk factors for DRT. After PSM, implantation depth was found to be predictive. Rates of stroke/TIA were higher in DRT patients (13.5% vs. 3.8%, Hazard Ratio: 4.21 [95%-confidence interval: 1.88-9.49], p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DRT after LAAC is associated with adverse outcome and appears to be of multifactorial origin, depending on patient characteristics, anticoagulation regimen and device position.