Introduction: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) device for stroke prevention is a safe and effective alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The safety of performing LAAC on uninterrupted warfarin (UW) compared to interrupted warfarin (IW) is currently unknown. Hypothesis: Complication rates of performing LAAC on UW vs. IW will be similar. Methods: We reviewed the data from the second half of PROTECT-AF trial, PREVAIL trial, CAP and CAP2 registries. Patients were categorized to the UW group if INR on the day of the procedure was ≥2 and to the IW group if INR was <2. Procedural complications within 7 days of LAAC were reviewed. An association between complications and AC strategy was analyzed. Results: Data from 1580 patients were reviewed and 294 patients (18.6%) received LAAC on UW. The UW group had a mean INR of 2.4±0.4 and IW group had a mean INR of 1.3±0.3. There were several differences in baseline characteristics: lower BMI in the UW group (28.6±5.3 vs 29.5±6.0, p=0.01), fewer patients with hypertension in the UW group (87.1% vs 91.1%, p=0.04), lower HAS-BLED score in the UW group (2.0±1.0 vs 2.1±1.0, p<0.01), and more patients with persistent AF in the UW group (37.1% vs 26.4%, p<0.01). Overall, there were no significant differences in total or individual complication rates between the two groups (UW 5.1% vs IW 6.1%, p=0.59). Although not statistically significant, lower event rates were noted in the UW group for the following: stroke (0% vs 0.3%, p>0.99), pericardial effusion requiring intervention (1.7% vs 1.8%, p>0.99), pseudoaneurysm (0% vs 0.4%, p=0.59), hematoma (0% vs 0.2%, p>0.99), and device embolism (0% vs 0.2%, p=1.0). The UW group had statistically insignificant higher events rates of AV fistula (0.3% vs 0%, p=0.19) and major bleeding requiring transfusion (1% vs 0.5%, p=0.38). In addition, there was no significant difference in periprocedural ischemic stroke (0% vs 0.3%, p>0.99). Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, no significant difference was observed in procedural complication rates when performing LAAC on UW vs. IW. These results suggest that LAAC can be safely performed without interruption of OAC.
Two‐Year Outcomes With a Next‐Generation Left Atrial Appendage Device: Final Results of the PINNACLE FLX Trial
Background The PINNACLE FLX (Protection Against Embolism for Non‐valvular AF [Atrial Fibrillation] Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA [Left Atrial Appendage] Closure Technology) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of a next‐generation left atrial appendage closure device (WATCHMAN FLX; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). At 1 year, the study met the primary end points of safety and anatomical efficacy/appendage closure. This final report of the PINNACLE FLX trial includes the prespecified secondary end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 2 years, also making it the first report of 2‐year outcomes with this next‐generation left atrial appendage closure device. Methods and Results Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women), with an appropriate rationale for left atrial appendage closure, were enrolled to receive the left atrial appendage closure device at 29 US centers. Adverse events were assessed by an independent clinical events committee, and imaging was assessed by independent core laboratories. Among 395 implanted patients (36% women; mean age, 74 years; CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc, 4.2±1.5), the secondary efficacy end point of 2‐year ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was met, with an absolute rate of 3.4% (annualized rate, 1.7%) and an upper 1‐sided 95% confidence bound of 5.3%, which was superior to the 8.7% performance goal. Two‐year rates of adverse events were as follows: 9.3% all‐cause mortality, 5.5% cardiovascular death, 3.4% all stroke, and 10.1% major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5). There were no additional systemic embolisms, device embolizations, pericardial effusions, or symptomatic device‐related thrombi after 1 year. Conclusions The secondary end point of 2‐year stroke or systemic embolism was met at 3.4%. In these final results of the PINNACLE FLX trial, the next‐generation WATCHMAN FLX device demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy outcomes.
Cardiac computed tomography following Watchman FLX implantation: device-related thrombus or device healing?
Abstract Aims Cardiac computed tomography (CT) is increasingly utilized during follow-up after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). Hypoattenuated thickening (HAT) is a common finding and might represent either benign device healing or device-related thrombosis (DRT). The appearance and characteristics of HAT associated with the Watchman FLX have not been previously described. Therefore, we sought to investigate cardiac CT findings during follow-up after Watchman FLX implantation with a focus on HAT and DRT. Methods and results Retrospective single-centre, observational study including all patients with successful Watchman FLX implantation and follow-up cardiac CT between March 2019 and September 2021 (n = 244). Blinded analysis of CT images was performed describing the localization, extent, and morphology of HAT and correlated to imaging and histology findings in a canine model. Relevant clinical and preclinical ethical approvals were obtained. Overall, HAT was present in 156 cases (64%) and could be classified as either subfabric hypoattenuation (n = 59), flat sessile HAT (n = 78), protruding sessile HAT (n = 16), or pedunculated HAT (n = 3). All cases of pedunculated HAT and five cases of protruding sessile HAT were considered as high-grade HAT (n = 7). Subfabric hypoattenuation and flat sessile HAT correlated with device healing and endothelialization in histological analysis of explanted devices. Conclusion Subfabric hypoattenuation and flat sessile HAT are frequent CT findings for Watchman FLX, likely representing benign device healing and endothelialization. Pedunculated HAT and protruding HAT are infrequent CT findings that might represent DRT.
Leak closure following left atrial appendage exclusion procedures: A multicenter registry
AbstractBackgroundThough infrequent, incomplete left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may result from residual leaks. Percutaneous closure has been described though data is limited.MethodsWe compiled a registry from four centers of patients undergoing percutaneous closure of residual leaks following LAAC via surgical means or with the Watchman device. Leak severity was classified as none (no leak), mild (1–2 mm), moderate (3–4 mm), or severe (≥5 mm). Procedural and clinical success was defined as the elimination of leak or mild residual leak at the conclusion of the procedure or follow‐up, respectively.ResultsOf 72 (age 72.2 ± 9.2 years; 67% male) patients, 53 had undergone prior LAAC using the Watchman device and 19 patients surgical LAAC. Mean CHADS2‐VA2Sc score was 4.0 ± 1.8. The median leak size was 5 mm, range: 2–13). A total of 13 received Amplatzer Vascular Plug‐II, 18 received Amplatzer Duct Occluder‐II and 40 patients received coils. One underwent closure using a 21 mm‐Watchman. Procedural success was 94%. Zero surgical and nine Watchman patients (13%) had a residual leak at procedural‐end (five mild, three moderate, and one severe)—only one patient had no reduction in leak size. Overall leak size reduction was 94%. Two (3%) had intraoperative pericardial effusion. There were no device embolizations, device‐related thrombi, or procedural deaths. Clinical success was maintained at 94%. Two had cerebrovascular accidents—at 2 days (transient ischemic attack) and 10 months postprocedure. Two had major bleeding outside the 30‐day periprocedural window.ConclusionPercutaneous closure of residual leaks following left atrial appendage closure is feasible and associated with good outcomes. The procedural risk appears to be satisfactory.
Primary Outcome Evaluation of a Next-Generation Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device
Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation for thromboembolic risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Since regulatory approval in 2015, the WATCHMAN device has been the only LAA closure device available for clinical use in the United States. The PINNACLE FLX study (Protection Against Embolism for Nonvalvular AF Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA Closure Technology) evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX LAA closure device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in whom oral anticoagulation is indicated, but who have an appropriate rationale to seek a nonpharmaceutical alternative. Methods: This was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter US Food and Drug Administration study. The primary safety end point was the occurrence of one of the following events within 7 days after the procedure or by hospital discharge, whichever was later: death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device- or procedure-related events requiring cardiac surgery. The primary effectiveness end point was the incidence of effective LAA closure (peri-device flow ≤5 mm), as assessed by the echocardiography core laboratory at 12-month follow-up. Results: A total of 400 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 73.8±8.6 years and the mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score was 4.2±1.5. The incidence of the primary safety end point was 0.5% with a 1-sided 95% upper CI of 1.6%, meeting the performance goal of 4.2% ( P <0.0001). The incidence of the primary effectiveness end point was 100%, with a 1-sided 95% lower CI of 99.1%, again meeting the performance goal of 97.0% ( P <0.0001). Device-related thrombus was reported in 7 patients, no patients experienced pericardial effusion requiring open cardiac surgery, and there were no device embolizations. Conclusions: LAA closure with this next-generation LAA closure device was associated with a low incidence of adverse events and a high incidence of anatomic closure. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02702271.