Literature DB >> 33413869

Peridevice Leak Following Amplatzer Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Cardiac Computed Tomography Classification and Clinical Outcomes.

Kasper Korsholm1, Jesper Møller Jensen2, Bjarne Linde Nørgaard2, Athanasios Samaras2, Jacqueline Saw3, Sergio Berti4, Apostolos Tzikas5, Jens Erik Nielsen-Kudsk2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate cardiac computed tomography (CT) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) peridevice leak (PDL) assessments, and the clinical relevance of PDL.
BACKGROUND: PDL assessment is integral during follow-up after left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion. Comparative studies of TEE and cardiac CT are sparse, and the clinical relevance of PDL is uncertain.
METHODS: This was a single-center observational study of consecutive patients undergoing LAA occlusion with Amplatzer devices (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet) between 2010 and 2018 (N = 415). Patients with both 8-week CT and TEE were included for analysis (n = 346). Images were analyzed by blinded investigators (K.K. and A.S.). PDL on cardiac CT was classified from grade 1 to 3, based on PDL at the device disc, device lobe, and LAA contrast patency. Primary clinical outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, or all-cause death.
RESULTS: PDL was present in 110 patients (32%) by TEE, with 29 (8%) >3 mm. By cardiac CT, 210 patients (61%) had PDL at the disc, with contrast patency in 204 patients (59%). A grade 3 PDL (gap at disc, lobe, and LAA contrast patency) was present in 63 patients (18%). Bland-Altman analysis showed poor agreement between CT and TEE for leak sizing. CT and TEE detected PDL was not significantly associated with worse outcome, hazard ratio: 1.82 (95 % confidence interval: 0.95 to 3.50); p = 0.07 and hazard ratio: 1.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 2.76); p = 0.28, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: PDL occurrence is substantially higher with CT compared with TEE, with a large discrepancy between modalities in leak quantification. A novel CT-based classification is proposed, yet PDL was not associated with worse clinical outcome.
Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Amplatzer; left atrial appendage; left atrial appendage occlusion; peridevice leak

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33413869     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.10.034

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


  3 in total

1.  Clinical Impact of Residual Leaks Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Insights From the NCDR LAAO Registry.

Authors:  Mohamad Alkhouli; Chengan Du; Ammar Killu; Trevor Simard; Peter A Noseworthy; Paul A Friedman; Jeptha P Curtis; James V Freeman; David R Holmes
Journal:  JACC Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2022-04-03

2.  Temporal changes and clinical significance of peridevice leak following left atrial appendage occlusion with Amplatzer devices.

Authors:  Kasper Korsholm; Jesper M Jensen; Bjarne L Nørgaard; Jens E Nielsen-Kudsk
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 2.585

Review 3.  Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: An Emerging Option in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation at High Risk of Bleeding.

Authors:  Giovanni Cimmino; Francesco S Loffredo; Emanuele Gallinoro; Dario Prozzo; Dario Fabiani; Luigi Cante; Gemma Salerno; Maurizio Cappelli Bigazzi; Paolo Golino
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 2.430

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.