Literature DB >> 27649848

Intracardiac versus transesophageal echocardiography for left atrial appendage occlusion with watchman.

Antonio H Frangieh1, Jasmina Alibegovic1, Christian Templin1, Oliver Gaemperli1, Slayman Obeid1, Robert Manka1, Erik W Holy1, Willibald Maier1, Thomas F Lüscher1, Ronald K Binder1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is mostly performed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) guidance. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) may be an alternative imaging modality for LAAO that precludes the need for general anesthesia or sedation. METHODS AND
RESULTS: All consecutive single center, single operator LAAO candidates were analyzed. Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared between patients in whom a Watchman was implanted with ICE vs. TEE guidance. In 76 consecutive patients the Watchman device was deployed under ICE in 32 patients (42%) and under TEE guidance in 44 patients (58%). Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups, except that patients in the TEE group were older (81 [75-85] years vs. 75 [68-80] years, P = 0.007). Total injected contrast media as well as fluoroscopy time were comparable between groups (90 ml [54-140] vs. 85 ml [80-110], P = 0.86 and 7.9 min [6.4-15.5] vs. 9.8 min [7.0-13.2], P = 0.51, for TEE vs. ICE, respectively). However, time from femoral venous puncture to transseptal puncture and to closure was longer in the ICE group (14 min [7.3-20] vs. 6 min [3.3-11], P = 0.007 and 48 min [40-60] vs. 34.5 min [27-44], P = 0.003, respectively). In the TEE group one patient suffered esophageal erosion with bleeding, which was managed conservatively and one non-LAAO related in-hospital mortality occurred in an 88-year-old patient. Device implantation success rate was 100% in both groups. No device embolization, no significant peri-device leak, no tamponade, no stroke, and no access site bleeding occurred in any patient. Total hospital stay for stand-alone LAAO was comparable between groups (2 days [2-2] vs. 2 days [2-3.3], P = 0.17, in ICE vs. TEE, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: ICE guidance for LAAO with the Watchman device is feasible and comparable to TEE and may become the preferred imaging modality for LAAO.
© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Watchman; atrial fibrillation; intracardiac echocardiography; left atrial appendage occlusion; oral anticoagulation; transesophageal echocardiography

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27649848     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26805

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  12 in total

1.  Intracardiac echocardiography versus transesophageal echocardiography for left atrial appendage closure: an updated meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Aravdeep Jhand; Abhishek Thandra; Yeongjin Gwon; Mohit K Turagam; Mahi Ashwath; Pradeep Yadav; Fawaz Alenezi; Jalal Garg; J Dawn Abbott; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy; Manish Parikh; Robert Sommer; Poonam Velagapudi
Journal:  Am J Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2020-12-15

2.  Feasibility of intracardiac echocardiography imaging from the left superior pulmonary vein for left atrial appendage occlusion.

Authors:  Do Young Kim; Seung Yong Shin; Jin-Seok Kim; Seong Hwan Kim; Young-Hoon Kim; Hong Euy Lim
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman device using intracardiac vs transesophageal echocardiography: Procedural and cost considerations.

Authors:  Majd E Hemam; Kenji Kuroki; Paul A Schurmann; Amish S Dave; Diego A Rodríguez; Luis C Sáenz; Vivek Y Reddy; Miguel Valderrábano
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 6.343

4.  Intracardiac versus transesophageal echocardiography to guide transcatheter closure of interatrial communications: Nationwide trend and comparative analysis.

Authors:  Fahad Alqahtani; Ashwin Bhirud; Sami Aljohani; James Mills; Akram Kawsara; Ashok Runkana; Mohamad Alkhouli
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Evaluating the role of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) in left atrial appendage occlusion: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Krishna Akella; Ghulam Murtaza; Mohit Turagam; Sharan Sharma; Bader Madoukh; Anish Amin; Rakesh Gopinathannair; Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 1.900

Review 6.  Left atrial appendage occlusion using intracardiac echocardiography.

Authors:  Apoor Patel; Rajesh Venkataraman; Paul Schurmann; Amish Dave; Miguel Valderrábano
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2020-10-05       Impact factor: 6.343

7.  4D Volume Intracardiac Echocardiography for Intraprocedural Guidance of Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Closure.

Authors:  Houman Khalili; Marquand Patton; Haider Al Taii; Priya Bansal; Matthew Brady; Jeanellil Taylor; Arati Gurung; Brijeshwar Maini
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2019-12-31

8.  'Minimalist approach' for transcatheter mitral valve replacement using intracardiac echocardiography and conscious sedation: a case series.

Authors:  Robert J Cubeddu; Abdullah Sarkar; Viviana Navas; Jose L Navia
Journal:  Eur Heart J Case Rep       Date:  2020-04-24

9.  Comparison of transesophageal and intracardiac echocardiography in guiding percutaneous left atrial appendage closure with an Amplatzer Amulet device.

Authors:  Witold Streb; Katarzyna Mitręga; Tomasz Podolecki; Stanisław Morawski; Mariola Szulik; Ewa Jędrzejczyk-Patej; Tomasz Kukulski; Zbigniew Kalarus
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2019-12-08       Impact factor: 1.426

10.  Fusion Imaging of X-ray and Transesophageal Echocardiography Improves the Procedure of Left Atrial Appendage Closure.

Authors:  Henning Ebelt; Thomas Domagala; Alexandra Offhaus; Matthias Wiora; Andreas Schwenzky; Matthias Hoyme; Jelena Anacker; Peter Röhl
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.727

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.