open access

Vol 24, No 5 (2017)
Review articles — Interventional cardiology
Published online: 2017-03-09
Get Citation

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: New perspectives for the method

Iwona Gorczyca-Michta, Beata Wożakowska-Kapłon
DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2017.0029
·
Pubmed: 28281734
·
Cardiol J 2017;24(5):554-562.

open access

Vol 24, No 5 (2017)
Review articles — Interventional cardiology
Published online: 2017-03-09

Abstract

Ischemic stroke is a common complication of atrial fibrillation (AF). Currently, oral anticoagulant drugs are the most commonly used method of stroke prevention. Left atrial appendage occlusion is thought to be the main source of thrombi in patients with AF. Percutaneous left atrial appendage is a valuable therapeutic option for selected high-risk patients with AF and contraindications for oral anticoagulation therapy. While complete closure of the left atrial appendage is the goal of a device implantation the variable nature of the left atrial appendage anatomy makes this goal difficult to achieve. Currently, there are several types of devices available for left atrial appendage occlusion. Since the first percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion in 2002 many studies have investigated both the safety and efficacy of this therapy using different closure devices. Still unresolved issues include a lack of data on optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after left atrial appendage occlusion.  

Abstract

Ischemic stroke is a common complication of atrial fibrillation (AF). Currently, oral anticoagulant drugs are the most commonly used method of stroke prevention. Left atrial appendage occlusion is thought to be the main source of thrombi in patients with AF. Percutaneous left atrial appendage is a valuable therapeutic option for selected high-risk patients with AF and contraindications for oral anticoagulation therapy. While complete closure of the left atrial appendage is the goal of a device implantation the variable nature of the left atrial appendage anatomy makes this goal difficult to achieve. Currently, there are several types of devices available for left atrial appendage occlusion. Since the first percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion in 2002 many studies have investigated both the safety and efficacy of this therapy using different closure devices. Still unresolved issues include a lack of data on optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after left atrial appendage occlusion.  

Get Citation

Keywords

atrial fibrillation, left atrial appendage, thrombus, occlusion, contraindications to anticoagulant treatment

About this article
Title

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: New perspectives for the method

Journal

Cardiology Journal

Issue

Vol 24, No 5 (2017)

Pages

554-562

Published online

2017-03-09

DOI

10.5603/CJ.a2017.0029

Pubmed

28281734

Bibliographic record

Cardiol J 2017;24(5):554-562.

Keywords

atrial fibrillation
left atrial appendage
thrombus
occlusion
contraindications to anticoagulant treatment

Authors

Iwona Gorczyca-Michta
Beata Wożakowska-Kapłon

References (45)
  1. Stewart S, Hart CL, Hole DJ, et al. Population prevalence, incidence, and predictors of atrial fibrillation in the Renfrew/Paisley study. Heart. 2001; 86(5): 516–521.
  2. Lloyd-Jones D, Adams R, Carnethon M, et al. American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee, American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics — 2009 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation. 2009; 119(3): e21–e181.
  3. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study. Stroke. 1991; 22(8): 983–988.
  4. Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, et al. Warfarin use among ambulatory patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: the anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) study. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 131(12): 927–934.
  5. Tu HTH, Campbell BCV, Christensen S, et al. Echoplanar Imaging Thrombolytic Evaluation Trial (EPITHET) Investigators. Pathophysiological determinants of worse stroke outcome in atrial fibrillation. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010; 30(4): 389–395.
  6. Lin HJ, Wolf PA, Kelly-Hayes M, et al. Stroke severity in atrial fibrillation. The Framingham Study. Stroke. 1996; 27(10): 1760–1764.
  7. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Meta-analysis: antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2007; 146(12): 857–867.
  8. Waldo AL, Becker RC, Tapson VF, et al. NABOR Steering Committee. Hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation and a high risk of stroke are not being provided with adequate anticoagulation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 46(9): 1729–1736.
  9. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. 2014; 383(9921): 955–962.
  10. Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Europace. 2016; 18(11): 1609–1678.
  11. Aberg H. Atrial fibrillation. I. A study of atrial thrombosis and systemic embolism in a necropsy material. Acta Med Scand. 1969; 185(5): 373–379.
  12. Stoddard MF, Dawkins PR, Prince CR, et al. Left atrial appendage thrombus is not uncommon in patients with acute atrial fibrillation and a recent embolic event: A transesophageal echocardiographics tudy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25(2): 452–459.
  13. Wunderlich NC, Beigel R, Swaans MJ, et al. Percutaneous interventions for left atrial appendage exclusion: options, assessment, and imaging using 2D and 3D echocardiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8(4): 472–488.
  14. Beigel R, Wunderlich NC, Kar S, et al. The evolution of percutaneous mitral valve repair therapy: lessons learned and implications for patient selection. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(24): 2688–2700.
  15. Kimura T, Takatsuki S, Inagawa K, et al. Anatomical characteristics of the left atrial appendage in cardiogenic stroke with low CHADS2 scores. Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10(6): 921–925.
  16. Wąsek WC, Rosso R. Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion in the prevention of stroke and death in patients with atrial fibrillation. Kardiol Pol. 2014; 72(11): 1127–1134.
  17. Veinot JP, Harrity PJ, Gentile F, et al. Anatomy of the normal left atrial appendage: a quantitative study of age-related changes in 500 autopsy hearts: implications for echocardiographic examination. Circulation. 1997; 96(9): 3112–3115.
  18. Yamamoto M, Seo Y, Kawamatsu N, et al. Complex left atrial appendage morphology and left atrial appendage thrombus formation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 7(2): 337–343.
  19. Nucifora G, Faletra FF, Regoli F, et al. Evaluation of the left atrial appendage with real-time 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography: implications for catheter-based left atrial appendage closure. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011; 4(5): 514–523.
  20. Sievert H, Lesh MD, Trepels T, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage transcatheter occlusion to prevent stroke in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation: early clinical experience. Circulation. 2002; 105(16): 1887–1889.
  21. Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Turi ZG, et al. PROTECT AF Investigators. Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2009; 374(9689): 534–542.
  22. Alli O, Doshi S, Kar S, et al. Quality of life assessment in the randomized PROTECT AF (Percutaneous Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage Versus Warfarin Therapy for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) trial of patients at risk for stroke with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 61(17): 1790–1798.
  23. Gangireddy SR, Halperin JL, Fuster V, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: an assessment of net clinical benefit. Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(21): 2700–2708.
  24. Reddy VY, Sievert H, Halperin J, et al. PROTECT AF Steering Committee and Investigators. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure vs warfarin for atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014; 312(19): 1988–1998.
  25. Holmes DR, Kar S, Price MJ, et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of the Watchman left atrial appendage closure device in patients with atrial fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy: the PREVAIL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(1): 1–12.
  26. Holmes DR, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. Left atrial appendage closure as an alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a patient-level meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65(24): 2614–2623.
  27. Sabiniewicz R, Hiczkiewicz J, Wańczura P, et al. First-in-human experience with the Cardia Ultraseal left atrial appendage closure device: The feasibility study. Cardiol J. 2016; 23(6): 652–654.
  28. Reddy VY, Möbius-Winkler S, Miller MA, et al. Left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman device in patients with a contraindication for oral anticoagulation: the ASAP study (ASA Plavix Feasibility Study With Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 61(25): 2551–2556.
  29. Tzikas A, Shakir S, Gafoor S, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: multicentre experience with the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug. EuroIntervention. 2016; 11(10): 1170–1179.
  30. Kefer J, Vermeersch P, Budts W, et al. Transcatheter left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation with Amplatzer cardiac plug: the Belgian Registry. Acta Cardiol. 2013; 68(6): 551–558.
  31. Urena M, Rodés-Cabau J, Freixa X, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure with the AMPLATZER cardiac plug device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and contraindications to anticoagulation therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62(2): 96–102.
  32. López-Mínguez JR, Eldoayen-Gragera J, González-Fernández R, et al. Immediate and one-year results in 35 consecutive patients after closure of left atrial appendage with the Amplatzer cardiac plug. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2013; 66(2): 90–97.
  33. Price MJ, Gibson DN, Yakubov SJ, et al. Early safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage suture ligation: results from the U.S. transcatheter LAA ligation consortium. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(6): 565–572.
  34. Bartus K, Han FT, Bednarek J, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage suture ligation using the LARIAT device in patients with atrial fibrillation: initial clinical experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62(2): 108–118.
  35. Miller MA, Gangireddy SR, Doshi SK, et al. Multicenter study on acute and long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure using an epicardial suture snaring device. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11(11): 1853–1859.
  36. Boersma LVA, Schmidt B, Betts TR, et al. EWOLUTION investigators. Implant success and safety of left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device: peri-procedural outcomes from the EWOLUTION registry. Eur Heart J. 2016; 37(31): 2465–2474.
  37. Reddy VY, Holmes D, Doshi SK, et al. Safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: results from the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients with AF (PROTECT AF) clinical trial and the Continued Access Registry. Circulation. 2011; 123(4): 417–424.
  38. Bösche LI, Afshari F, Schöne D, et al. Initial experience with novel oral anticoagulants during the first 45 days after left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman device. Clin Cardiol. 2015; 38(12): 720–724.
  39. Jaguszewski M, Manes C, Puippe G, et al. Cardiac CT and echocardiographic evaluation of peri-device flow after percutaneous left atrial appendage closure using the AMPLATZER cardiac plug device. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 85(2): 306–312.
  40. López Mínguez JR, Asensio JM, Gragera JE, et al. Two-year clinical outcome from the Iberian registry patients after left atrial appendage closure. Heart. 2015; 101(11): 877–883.
  41. Neuzner J, Dietze T, Paliege R, et al. Left atrial appendage closure with the Amplatzer™ Cardiac Plug: Rationale for a higher degree of device oversizing at implantation. Cardiol J. 2015; 22(2): 201–205.
  42. Aytemir K, Aminian A, Asil S, et al. First case of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure by amulet™ device in a patient with left atrial appendage thrombus. Int J Cardiol. 2016; 223: 28–30.
  43. Bokhari SSI, Martinez-Clark P, Zambrano JP, et al. Percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy of left atrial appendage thrombus with bilateral neuro-embolic protection followed by closure of left atrial appendage. EuroIntervention. 2012; 8(3): 408–409.
  44. Meincke F, Kreidel F, von Wedel J, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with left atrial appendage thrombus. EuroIntervention. 2015; 10(10): 1208.
  45. Jalal Z, Iriart X, Dinet ML, et al. Extending percutaneous left atrial appendage closure indications using the AMPLATZER™ Cardiac Plug device in patients with persistent left atrial appendage thrombus: The thrombus trapping technique. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2016; 109(12): 659–666.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl