Muhammad R Afzal1, Christopher R Ellis2, James Gabriels3, Mikhael El-Chami4, Anish Amin5, Zaher Fanari6, David Delurgio4, Roy M John3, Apoor Patel3, Thomas A Haldis7, Jeffrey A Goldstein8, Steven Yakubov5, Emile G Daoud1, John D Hummel9. 1. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio. 2. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. 3. Northwell Health, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York. 4. Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 5. OhioHealth Heart and Vascular Physicians, Riverside Methodist Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. 6. University of Kansas Medical Center, Wichita, Kansas. 7. Sanford Health, Fargo, North Dakota. 8. Prairie Heart Institute, Springfield, Illinois. 9. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: john.hummel@osumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Experience with retrieval of a Watchman left atrial (LA) appendage (LAA) closure device (WD) is limited. An embolized or grossly malpositioned WD warrants retrieval to minimize the risk of thromboembolic complications and vascular occlusion. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report approaches for percutaneous retrieval of a WD from multicenter experience. METHODS: Data on successful WD retrievals were obtained from high-volume operators. Data included clinical characteristics; structural characteristics of the LA and LAA; and procedural details of the deployment and retrieval procedure, type of retrieval (immediate: during the same procedure; delayed: during a separate procedure after the successful deployment), equipment used, complications, and postretrieval management. RESULTS: Ten successful percutaneous and 1 surgical retrievals comprised this study. Seven patients had immediate retrieval, while 4 had delayed retrieval. The median duration before delayed retrieval was 45 days (range 1-45 days). The median LAA diameter and size of a successfully deployed WD was 16 mm (range 14-24 mm) and 21 mm (range 21-30 mm), respectively. A WD was retrieved from the LA (n = 1), LAA (n = 2), left ventricle (n = 2), and aorta (n = 6). The reason for retrieval from the LAA was inadequate deployment, resulting in a significant peri-device leak. Retrieval from the LA or LAA was successfully performed using snares (n = 2) and a Raptor grasping device (n = 1). Retrieval from the left ventricle was achieved with a snare (n = 1) and surgery (n = 1). Retrieval from the aorta required snares (n = 5) and retrieval forceps (n = 1). Five patients were successfully reimplanted with a larger size WD. The only complication during percutaneous retrieval was a pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSION: Retrieval of an embolized or malpositioned WD is feasible, and familiarity with snares and grasping tools can facilitate a successful removal.
BACKGROUND: Experience with retrieval of a Watchman left atrial (LA) appendage (LAA) closure device (WD) is limited. An embolized or grossly malpositioned WD warrants retrieval to minimize the risk of thromboembolic complications and vascular occlusion. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report approaches for percutaneous retrieval of a WD from multicenter experience. METHODS: Data on successful WD retrievals were obtained from high-volume operators. Data included clinical characteristics; structural characteristics of the LA and LAA; and procedural details of the deployment and retrieval procedure, type of retrieval (immediate: during the same procedure; delayed: during a separate procedure after the successful deployment), equipment used, complications, and postretrieval management. RESULTS: Ten successful percutaneous and 1 surgical retrievals comprised this study. Seven patients had immediate retrieval, while 4 had delayed retrieval. The median duration before delayed retrieval was 45 days (range 1-45 days). The median LAA diameter and size of a successfully deployed WD was 16 mm (range 14-24 mm) and 21 mm (range 21-30 mm), respectively. A WD was retrieved from the LA (n = 1), LAA (n = 2), left ventricle (n = 2), and aorta (n = 6). The reason for retrieval from the LAA was inadequate deployment, resulting in a significant peri-device leak. Retrieval from the LA or LAA was successfully performed using snares (n = 2) and a Raptor grasping device (n = 1). Retrieval from the left ventricle was achieved with a snare (n = 1) and surgery (n = 1). Retrieval from the aorta required snares (n = 5) and retrieval forceps (n = 1). Five patients were successfully reimplanted with a larger size WD. The only complication during percutaneous retrieval was a pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSION:Retrieval of an embolized or malpositioned WD is feasible, and familiarity with snares and grasping tools can facilitate a successful removal.