Closure of peri-device leaks (PDL) after incomplete LAAC have shown early feasibility, however no comparison study of all the leak closure modalities exists. Therefore, this is an attempt to report the first 3-way observational comparison study to date, with results in 160 total patients in 3 arms including detachable embolization coils, vascular plugs/septal occluders and Radiofrequency ablation.
Left Atrial Appendage (LAA) Closure (LAAC) is a potent technique of LAA isolation and exclusion for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, with evidence from the PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL-AF trials, including their 5-year follow-up assessments, solidifying LAAC as a viable option in these patients with comparable stroke reduction in comparison to oral anticoagulation (OAC) as well as a reduction in bleeding risk, hemorrhagic CVA, and mortality. However, the surge in the multiple methods of LAA exclusion has also brought to attention postprocedural complications specific to LAAC, namely, peri-device leaks (PDL). The stroke implication and classification of PDL itself still lacks consensus, with an increased thromboembolic (TE) potential due to PDL seen in patients with LARIAT and surgical ligation procedures, yet no statistically significant relationship seen in percutaneous and endocardial LAA closure approaches. PDL \> 5mm has been widely accepted as clinically significant, although there remains limited data with no current established guidelines. Placement of a septal occluder device such as Amplatzer Vascular Plug, Detachable embolization coils, Gore Cardioform Septal Occluder (CSO; W.L. Gore and Associates, Newark DE), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have all emerged as options to resolve residual PDL and post-surgical/ligation leaks. However, there exists no head-to-head comparison between these modalities. Given their emergence, this is a proposed a multi-center observational study to further assess and evaluate these three treatment modalities for their efficacy for leak closure, assessment of pre-, peri- and post-procedural characteristics after leak closure, TE events, and bleeding risk, and complication rates.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
160
All patients were evaluated and followed with imaging, and per investigators' respective clinical judgement, then proceeded to have an intervention for leak closure with either detachable embolization coils, vascular plugs/CSO, or RFA.
Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute
Overland Park, Kansas, United States
Size of PDL After Leak Closure Procedure
Size of leak in mm on TEE after leak closure procedure, immediately at the end of the procedure and at 1 year follow-up
Time frame: Immediate postprocedural and 1 year follow-up
Periprocedural Complications Occurring From Postoperative Day 0 - Day 7
Periprocedural complications occurring from Postoperative days 0 - 7, including: device-related thrombus, pericardial effusion/pericardial tamponade requiring intervention and CVA.
Time frame: From postoperative day 0 to day 7
Delayed Procedure-related Complications at 1 Year Follow-up
Secondary Safety Endpoint: Delayed procedure-related complications at 1 year follow-up including device-related thrombus, pericardial effusion/ pericardial tamponade requiring intervention and CVA.
Time frame: 1 year after procedure
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.