Outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion vs. non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation

Background The effects of left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion compared to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain unknown. Aims We aimed to evaluate the outcomes in patients with AF who received LAA occlusion vs. NOAC therapy. Methods We utilised data from TriNetX which is a global federated health research network currently containing data for 88.5 million patients. ICD-10 codes were employed to identify AF patients treated with either LAA occlusion or NOAC between 1st December 2010 and 17th January 2019. Clinical outcomes of interest were analysed up to 2 years. Results 108,697 patients were included. Patients who underwent LAA occlusion were younger, more likely to be white Caucasian and male, had a greater incidence of comorbidities, and were less likely to be prescribed other cardiovascular medications. Using propensity score matching, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly lower among patients who received LAA occlusion compared to NOAC therapy [1.51% vs. 5.60%, RR 0.27 (95% CI 0.14–0.54)], but there were no statistical differences in the composite thrombotic or thromboembolic events [8.17% vs. 7.72%, RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.73–1.53)], ischaemic stroke or TIA [4.69% vs. 5.45%, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.54–1.38)], venous thromboembolism [1.66% vs. 1.51%, RR 1.10 (95% CI 0.47–2.57)] and intracranial haemorrhage [1.51% vs. 1.51%, RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.42–2.39)]. Conclusion Overall, LAA occlusion might be a suitable alternative to NOAC therapy for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Graphical abstract

Heart Team for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Patient-Tailored Approach

Background and Purpose: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an accepted therapeutic option for stroke prevention; however, the ideal technique and device have not yet been identified. In this study we evaluate the potential role of a heart team approach for patients contraindicated for oral anticoagulants and indicated for left atrial appendage closure, to minimize risk and optimize benefit in a patient-centered decision-making process. Methods: Forty patients were evaluated by the heart team for appendage occlusion. Variables considered were CHA2DS2VASc, HASBLED, documented blood transfusions, comorbidities, event forcing anticoagulant interruption, past medical history, anatomy of the left atrial appendage, and patient quality of life. Twenty patients had their appendage occluded percutaneously (65% male, mean age 72.3 ± 7.5, mean CHA2DS2VASc 4.2 ± 1.5, mean HASBLED 3.5 ± 1.1). The other twenty underwent thoracoscopic occlusion (65% male, mean age of 74.9 ± 8, mean CHA2DS2VASc 6.0 ± 1.5, HASBLED mean 5.4 ± 1.4). Percutaneous patients were on dual antiplatelet therapy for the first three months and aspirin thereafter, whereas the others received no anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy from the day of surgery. Follow up included TEE, CT scan, and periodical clinical evaluation. Results: Mean duration of procedures and hospital stay were comparable. All patients had complete exclusion of the appendage; at a mean follow up of 33.1 ± 14.1 months, no neurological or hemorrhagic events were reported. Conclusions: A heart team approach may improve the decision-making process for stroke and hemorrhage prevention, where LAAO is a therapeutic option. Percutaneous and thoracoscopic appendage occlusion seem to be comparably safe and effective. An epicardial LAAO could be advisable in patients for whom the risk of bleeding is estimated as being too high for post-procedural antiplatelet therapy.

Asymptomatic Stroke in the Setting of Percutaneous Non-Coronary Intervention Procedures

Advancements in clinical management, pharmacological therapy and interventional procedures have strongly improved the survival rate for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Nevertheless, the patients affected by CVDs are more often elderly and present several comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, heart failure, and chronic coronary syndrome. Standard treatments are frequently not available for “frail patients”, in particular due to high surgical risk or drug interaction. In the past decades, novel less-invasive procedures such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), MitraClip or left atrial appendage occlusion have been proposed to treat CVD patients who are not candidates for standard procedures. These procedures have been confirmed to be effective and safe compared to conventional surgery, and symptomatic thromboembolic stroke represents a rare complication. However, while the peri-procedural risk of symptomatic stroke is low, several studies highlight the presence of a high number of silent ischemic brain lesions occurring mainly in areas with a low clinical impact. The silent brain damage could cause neuropsychological deficits or worse, a preexisting dementia, suggesting the need to systematically evaluate the impact of these procedures on neurological function.

Congenital Absence of Left Atrial Appendage in a Patient with Ischemic Stroke

We report a case of congenital absence of left atrial appendage in a 68 years old female who was going to proceed a left atrial appendage occlusion for ischemic stroke in whom we observed the absence of left atrial appendage by Real-Time 3D Transesophageal echocardiography (RT 3D TEE).

Percutaneous Extraction of a Large Device Related Thrombus on a Watchman™ Device: A Case Report

Background Left atrial appendage occlusion devices are commonly used to prevent stroke in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation who are unable to tolerate anticoagulation. However certain patient and device related characteristics increase the risk for the development of a device related thrombus. The presence of a device related thrombus increases the risk of stroke and should be treated. Management of device related thrombus lacks consensus but is mostly focused on anticoagulation. In patients with large thrombi that need to be managed urgently, percutaneous extraction may be a viable option. Case Summary In this report we describe the successful management of a device related thrombus via percutaneous thrombus extraction technology in an 81-year-old woman with a large thrombus attached to a WATCHMAN™ device. The patient initially presented with shortness of breath, and on imaging a pedunculated thrombus was detected. The thrombus was extracted using a Penumbra Lightning 12™ (Penumbra Inc., Alameda, CA) catheter with a Sentinel™ (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) cerebral embolic protection device. The patient had no neurologic sequelae and was started on anticoagulation. Discussion Percutaneous thrombectomy can be safely performed to extract large left atrial occlusion device related thrombus that require urgent management, without any neurologic sequelae. We believe this can be used in patients with a large device related thrombus who would not be adequately managed with anticoagulation and in whom surgery is not feasible.