open access

Vol 82, No 4 (2023)
Original article
Submitted: 2022-07-14
Accepted: 2022-08-19
Published online: 2022-08-25
Get Citation

Morphometrical features of left atrial appendage in the atrial fibrillation patients subjected to left atrial appendage closure

K. M. Słodowska1, J. Batko1, J. P. Hołda1, D. Dudkiewicz1, M. Koziej1, R. Litwinowicz2, K. Bartuś2, M. K. Hołda13
·
Pubmed: 36165901
·
Folia Morphol 2023;82(4):814-821.
Affiliations
  1. Heart Embryology and Anatomy Research Team (HEART), Department of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
  2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery and Transplantology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
  3. Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom

open access

Vol 82, No 4 (2023)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Submitted: 2022-07-14
Accepted: 2022-08-19
Published online: 2022-08-25

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the morphometrical features of left
atrial appendage (LAA) in patients with atrial fibrillation, subjected to LAA percutaneous
closure (LARIAT) for stroke prevention.
Materials and methods: Computed tomography (CT) scans of 51 patients with
atrial fibrillation subjected to LARIAT procedure were comparatively evaluated with
50 patients with sinus rhythm (control group). Three-dimensional reconstructions
were created using volume-rendering for evaluation.
Results: No differences were found in LAA types of distribution (cauliflower:
25.5 vs. 34.0%, chicken wing: 45.1 vs. 46.0%, arrowhead: 29.4 vs. 20.0%, all
p > 0.05) between groups. However, the study group was characterized by LAAs
with a lower number of lobes. The LAA orifice anteroposterior and transverse
diameters (19.3 ± 4.12 vs. 17.2 ± 4.0 mm, p = 0.01 and 25.1 ± 5.1 vs. 20.5 ±
± 4.4 mm, p = 0.001), orifice area (387.2 ± 133.9 vs. 327.1 ± 128.3 mm2,
p = 0.02) and orifice perimeter (70.2 ± 12.5 vs. 61.2 ± 11.6 mm, p = 0.04) was
significantly larger in atrial fibrillation patients. More oval LAA orifices was found
in atrial fibrillation group (94.0 vs. 70.4%, p = 0.001). No statistically significant
differences were found in LAA body length (47.4 ± 15.4 vs. 43.7 ± 10.9 mm,
p = 0.17), body width (24.7 ± 5.6 vs. 24.4 ± 5.8 mm, p = 0.81), and chamber
depth (17.7 ± 3.5 vs. 16.5 ± 3.8 mm, p = 0.11). Calculated LAA ejection fraction
was significantly lower in study group compared to healthy patients (16.4 ± 14.9
vs. 48.2 ± 12.9%, p = 0.001).
Conclusions: Important morphometrical differences in LAA orifice have been
found, which was significantly larger and more oval in patients with atrial fibrillation
compared to healthy controls. Although no difference in LAA body type
and size was observed; the LAA ejection fraction was significantly lower in atrial
fibrillation rhythm patients.

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the morphometrical features of left
atrial appendage (LAA) in patients with atrial fibrillation, subjected to LAA percutaneous
closure (LARIAT) for stroke prevention.
Materials and methods: Computed tomography (CT) scans of 51 patients with
atrial fibrillation subjected to LARIAT procedure were comparatively evaluated with
50 patients with sinus rhythm (control group). Three-dimensional reconstructions
were created using volume-rendering for evaluation.
Results: No differences were found in LAA types of distribution (cauliflower:
25.5 vs. 34.0%, chicken wing: 45.1 vs. 46.0%, arrowhead: 29.4 vs. 20.0%, all
p > 0.05) between groups. However, the study group was characterized by LAAs
with a lower number of lobes. The LAA orifice anteroposterior and transverse
diameters (19.3 ± 4.12 vs. 17.2 ± 4.0 mm, p = 0.01 and 25.1 ± 5.1 vs. 20.5 ±
± 4.4 mm, p = 0.001), orifice area (387.2 ± 133.9 vs. 327.1 ± 128.3 mm2,
p = 0.02) and orifice perimeter (70.2 ± 12.5 vs. 61.2 ± 11.6 mm, p = 0.04) was
significantly larger in atrial fibrillation patients. More oval LAA orifices was found
in atrial fibrillation group (94.0 vs. 70.4%, p = 0.001). No statistically significant
differences were found in LAA body length (47.4 ± 15.4 vs. 43.7 ± 10.9 mm,
p = 0.17), body width (24.7 ± 5.6 vs. 24.4 ± 5.8 mm, p = 0.81), and chamber
depth (17.7 ± 3.5 vs. 16.5 ± 3.8 mm, p = 0.11). Calculated LAA ejection fraction
was significantly lower in study group compared to healthy patients (16.4 ± 14.9
vs. 48.2 ± 12.9%, p = 0.001).
Conclusions: Important morphometrical differences in LAA orifice have been
found, which was significantly larger and more oval in patients with atrial fibrillation
compared to healthy controls. Although no difference in LAA body type
and size was observed; the LAA ejection fraction was significantly lower in atrial
fibrillation rhythm patients.

Get Citation

Keywords

left atrial appendage closure, left atrial appendage shape, atrial fibrillation, stroke

About this article
Title

Morphometrical features of left atrial appendage in the atrial fibrillation patients subjected to left atrial appendage closure

Journal

Folia Morphologica

Issue

Vol 82, No 4 (2023)

Article type

Original article

Pages

814-821

Published online

2022-08-25

Page views

987

Article views/downloads

604

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2022.0080

Pubmed

36165901

Bibliographic record

Folia Morphol 2023;82(4):814-821.

Keywords

left atrial appendage closure
left atrial appendage shape
atrial fibrillation
stroke

Authors

K. M. Słodowska
J. Batko
J. P. Hołda
D. Dudkiewicz
M. Koziej
R. Litwinowicz
K. Bartuś
M. K. Hołda

References (28)
  1. Ausma J, Litjens N, Lenders MH, et al. Time course of atrial fibrillation-induced cellular structural remodeling in atria of the goat. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2001; 33(12): 2083–2094.
  2. Bartus K, Podolec J, Lee RJ, et al. Atrial natriuretic peptide and brain natriuretic peptide changes after epicardial percutaneous left atrial appendage suture ligation using LARIAT device. J Physiol Pharmacol. 2017; 68(1): 117–123.
  3. Floria M, Radu S, Gosav EM, et al. Left atrial structural remodelling in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: what have we learnt from CMR? Diagnostics (Basel). 2020; 10(3).
  4. Glikson M, Wolff R, Hindricks G, et al. EHRA/EAPCI expert consensus statement on catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion - an update. EuroIntervention. 2020; 15(13): 1133–1180.
  5. Goette A, Honeycutt C, Langberg JJ. Electrical remodeling in atrial fibrillation. Time course and mechanisms. Circulation. 1996; 94(11): 2968–2974.
  6. Gwak DS, Choi W, Kim YW, et al. Impact of left atrial appendage morphology on recurrence in embolic stroke of undetermined source and atrial cardiopathy. Front Neurol. 2021; 12: 679320.
  7. Hołda MK, Koziej M, Hołda J, et al. Anatomic characteristics of the mitral isthmus region: The left atrial appendage isthmus as a possible ablation target. Ann Anat. 2017; 210: 103–111.
  8. Iwama M, Kawasaki M, Tanaka R, et al. Left atrial appendage emptying fraction assessed by a feature-tracking echocardiographic method is a determinant of thrombus in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. J Cardiol. 2012; 59(3): 329–336.
  9. Jang SJ, Wong SC, Mosadegh B. Leaks after left atrial appendage closure: ignored or neglected? Cardiology. 2021; 146(3): 384–391.
  10. Jia D, Jeon B, Park HB, et al. Image-Based flow simulations of pre- and post-left atrial appendage closure in the left atrium. Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2019; 10(2): 225–241.
  11. John Camm A, Colombo A, Corbucci G, et al. Left atrial appendage closure: a new technique for clinical practice. Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11(3): 514–521.
  12. Karim N, Ho SY, Nicol E, et al. The left atrial appendage in humans: structure, physiology, and pathogenesis. Europace. 2020; 22(1): 5–18.
  13. Kishima H, Mine T, Takahashi S, et al. Morphologic remodeling of left atrial appendage in patients with atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2016; 13(9): 1823–1828.
  14. Kleindorfer D, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. 2021 guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2021; 52(7): 364–467.
  15. Lau I, Wong YH, Yeong CH, et al. Quantitative and qualitative comparison of low- and high-cost 3D-printed heart models. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2019; 9(1): 107–114.
  16. Litwinowicz R, Bartus M, Burysz M, et al. Long term outcomes after left atrial appendage closure with the LARIAT device-Stroke risk reduction over five years follow-up. PLoS One. 2018; 13(12): e0208710.
  17. Litwinowicz R, Witowski J, Sitkowski M, et al. Applications of low-cost 3D printing in left atrial appendage closure using epicardial approaches - initial clinical experience. Polish J Cardio-Thoracic Surg. 2018; 15(2): 135–140.
  18. Maan A, Heist EK. Left atrial appendage anatomy: implications for endocardial catheter-based device closure. J Innov Card Rhythm Manag. 2020; 11(7): 4179–4186.
  19. Masci A, Barone L, Dedè L, et al. The impact of left atrium appendage morphology on stroke risk assessment in atrial fibrillation: a computational fluid dynamics study. Front Physiol. 2018; 9: 1938.
  20. Naksuk N, Padmanabhan D, Yogeswaran V, et al. Left atrial appendage: embryology, anatomy, physiology, arrhythmia and therapeutic intervention. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2016; 2(4): 403–412.
  21. Patti G, Pengo V, Marcucci R, et al. The left atrial appendage: from embryology to prevention of thromboembolism. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(12): 877–887.
  22. Shimizu T, Takada T, Shimode A, et al. Association between paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and the left atrial appendage ejection fraction during sinus rhythm in the acute stage of stroke: a transesophageal echocardiographic study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013; 22(8): 1370–1376.
  23. Słodowska K, Szczepanek E, Dudkiewicz D, et al. Morphology of the left atrial appendage: introduction of a new simplified shape-based classification system. Heart Lung Circ. 2021; 30(7): 1014–1022.
  24. Taina M, Korhonen M, Haataja M, et al. Morphological and volumetric analysis of left atrial appendage and left atrium: cardiac computed tomography-based reproducibility assessment. PLoS One. 2014; 9(7): e101580.
  25. Thomas L, Abhayaratna WP. Left atrial reverse remodeling: mechanisms, evaluation, and clinical significance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017; 10(1): 65–77.
  26. Wilkins B, Fukutomi M, De Backer O, et al. Left atrial appendage closure: prevention and management of periprocedural and postprocedural complications. Card Electrophysiol Clin. 2020; 12(1): 67–75.
  27. 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.
  28. Zuo K, Sun L, Yang X, et al. Correlation between cardiac rhythm, left atrial appendage flow velocity, and CHA2DS2-VASc score: Study based on transesophageal echocardiography and 2-dimensional speckle tracking. Clin Cardiol. 2017; 40(2): 120–125.

Regulations

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 VM Media Group sp. z o.o., Grupa Via Medica, Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

tel.: +48 58 320 94 94, faks: +48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl