Literature DB >> 29880104

Intracardiac Versus Transesophageal Echocardiographic Guidance for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: The LAAO Italian Multicenter Registry.

Sergio Berti1, Luigi Emilio Pastormerlo2, Gennaro Santoro3, Elvis Brscic4, Matteo Montorfano5, Luigi Vignali6, Paolo Danna7, Claudio Tondo8, Marco Rezzaghi2, Gianpiero D'Amico9, Amerigo Stabile10, Salvatore Saccà11, Giuseppe Patti12, Antonio Rapacciuolo13, Arnaldo Poli14, Paolo Golino15, Paolo Magnavacchi16, Francesco Meucci3, Bruno Pezzulich4, Miroslava Stolcova2, Giuseppe Tarantini9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE)-guided versus transesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) by the use of Amplatzer Cardiac Plug or Amulet devices included in a large Italian registry.
BACKGROUND: TEE is widely used for LAAO procedure guidance. ICE may be a potential alternative imaging modality in LAAO.
METHODS: Data from 604 LAAO procedures performed in 16 Italian centers were reviewed. ICE-guided LAAO was performed in 187 patients, whereas TEE was used in 417 patients. Procedural success was defined as LAAO without occurrence of pericardial tamponade, stroke, systemic embolism with end organ damage, major bleeding, and device embolization. Stroke, transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, overall and cardiovascular death were analyzed.
RESULTS: CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, sex category) and HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal and liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol) scores were similar between the ICE and TEE groups. TEE implied lower procedural (delta 12 min) and fluoroscopy time (delta 5 min) when compared with ICE. Procedural success was similarly high (≥94%) between the TEE and ICE groups with a complication rate of 6.5% for TEE versus 4.2% for ICE (odds ratio: 1.468; 95% confidence interval: 0.681 to 3.166; p = 0.327). At median follow-up of 451 days (interquartile range: 162 to 899 days), the rate of cerebral ischemic events was similar between TEE-guided and ICE-guided procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: ICE-guided LAAO by means of Amplatzer devices may represent a second alternative imaging modality after an appropriate learning curve and bearing in mind that pre-procedural computed tomography imaging is mandatory. When comparing ICE with TEE, TEE remains the gold standard.
Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  echocardiography; intracardiac; left atrial appendage occlusion; transesophageal

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29880104     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.05.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  9 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

Review 2.  Outcomes of cardiac surgery with left atrial appendage occlusion versus no Occlusion, direct oral Anticoagulants, and vitamin K Antagonists: A systematic review with Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nso Nso; Mahmoud Nassar; Milana Zirkiyeva; Sofia Lakhdar; Tanveer Shaukat; Laura Guzman; Mohsen Alshamam; Allison Foster; Rubal Bhangal; Solomon Badejoko; Anthony Lyonga Ngonge; Mpey Tabot-Tabot; Yolanda Mbome; Vincent Rizzo; Most S Munira; Senthil Thambidorai
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2022-04-26

3.  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 4.  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

5.  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

6.  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

7.  Clinical Impact of Preprocedural CT-Based 3D Computational Simulation of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion with Amulet.

Authors:  Ian Buysschaert; Dries Viaene
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Stroke Prevention in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Fareed Moses S Collado; Claudia M Lama von Buchwald; Christina K Anderson; Nidhi Madan; Hussam S Suradi; Henry D Huang; Hani Jneid; Clifford J Kavinsky
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  A Comparative Study of Three Imaging Modalities for Size Selection of a Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device.

Authors:  Zhong-Bao Ruan; Fei Wang; Ge-Cai Chen; Li Zhu
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 2.759

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.