The WATCHMAN™ atrial appendage closure device is designed to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who are not suitable candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation therapy. However, the device also carries small risks, including procedural complications such as device migration, embolization, or pericardial effusion. We describe a case of WATCHMAN device migration requiring surgical retrieval.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a valid alternative to oral anticoagulation to prevent ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.The devices approved in Europe and United States for percutaneous LAAC contain metal and temporary antithrombotic therapy is strongly recommended following implantation to prevent thrombus formation on the atrial device surface. There is still uncertainty regarding to the optimal antithrombotic drug regimen after device implantation for several reasons. Thus, this review aims at summarizing the available evidence and the remaining challenges related to the management of antithrombotic therapy in the context of LAAC procedure.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

With the aim of reducing the risk of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA) in patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF), Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) devices are emerging as an alternative to oral anticoagulants.
To analyze the efficacy and safety of the LAAO procedure in patients with NVAF and contraindications and/or failure for oral anticoagulants.
The search for evidence was carried out in the electronic databases Medline and Embase till January 2024. Additional searches were conducted on Google Scholar. The clinical trials registry database was also consulted. Two blinded investigators performed the search, study selection, and data collection, and assessed quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for randomized clinical trials. Meta-analyses of eligible trials were performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. The random effects model was used for all analyses.
Five articles were selected, among which three were non-inferiority randomized clinical trials that analyzed the performance and safety of LAAO devices compared to the use of Vitamin K Antagonists (AVKs) or Novel Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs). No randomized clinical trials were found that analyzed populations with absolute contraindications to oral anticoagulants. Having as primary outcomes analyzed the occurrence of stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), cardiovascular or unexplained death and systemic embolism, the non-inferiority of the LAAO procedure compared to the use of oral anticoagulants was verified.
For patients with an absolute contraindication to anticoagulation and/or failure to use oral anticoagulants, evidence for the use of LAAO devices is scarce.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of and outcomes associated with different antithrombotic strategies after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) are not well described.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to evaluate patterns of antithrombotic medication strategies at discharge following LAAO with the Watchman FLX device in real-world practice and to compare the risk of adverse events among the different antithrombotic regimens.
METHODS: The authors evaluated patients in the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) LAAO Registry who underwent LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device between 2020 and 2022. They grouped patients by mutually exclusive discharge antithrombotic strategies and compared the rates of adverse events at 45 days and 6 months using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.
RESULTS: Among 53,878 patients undergoing successful LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device, the most common antithrombotic discharge regimens were direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) plus aspirin (48.3%), DOAC alone (22.6%), dual antiplatelet therapy (8.1%), warfarin plus aspirin (7.7%), and DOAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor (4.9%). In multivariate analysis, DOAC alone had a lower rate of major adverse events and major bleeding at 45 days of follow-up compared with DOAC plus aspirin (major adverse events: HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68-0.91; major bleeding: HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.60-0.80). These differences persisted at 6 months. Warfarin without aspirin also showed lower rates of major bleeding at both time points. No differences were seen in stroke/transient ischemic attack or device-related thrombus.
CONCLUSIONS: In real-world U.S. practice, discharge on DOAC alone or warfarin alone was associated with a lower rate of adverse events compared with DOAC plus aspirin.

Atrial fibrillation poses significant stroke risks, particularly in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Left atrial appendage occlusion has emerged as a crucial strategy for stroke prevention, garnering a Class I recommendation. This paper presents a technical framework for performing robotic left atrial appendage occlusion as an isolated procedure or concurrently with robotic coronary artery bypass grafting using the AtriCure AtriClip Pro2 device.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) slow-flow may increase the risk of ischemic stroke. We studied LAA attenuation on cardiac computed tomography in patients with acute ischemic stroke.
RESULTS: We used data from a prospective cohort of patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing cardiac computed tomography during the acute stroke imaging protocol. We compared characteristics, functional outcome (modified Rankin scale: higher scores indicating worse outcome), stroke recurrence and major adverse cardiovascular events after 2-year follow-up between patients with LAA thrombus (filling defect<100 Hounsfield Unit (HU)), slow-flow (filling defect ≥100 HU) and normal filling. Of 421 patients, 31 (7%) had LAA thrombus, 69 (16%) slow-flow, and 321 (76%) normal filling. Patients with thrombus or slow-flow more often had known atrial fibrillation compared with normal filling (45%, 39%, and 9%, P<0.001). Patients with thrombus had higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale-scores compared with slow-flow and normal filling (18 [interquartile range, 9-22], 6 [interquartile range, 3-17], and 5 [interquartile range, 2-11], P<0.001). Compared with normal filling, there was no difference with slow-flow in functional outcome (median modified Rankin scale, 3 versus 2; acOR 0.8 [95% CI, 0.5-1.4]), stroke recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.3-1.9]) or major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.7-2.1]), while patients with thrombus had worse functional outcome (median modified Rankin scale, 6, acOR, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.5-7.4]). In cryptogenic stroke patients (n=156) slow-flow was associated with stroke recurrence (27% versus 6%, aHR, 4.1 [95% CI, 1.1-15.7]).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with slow-flow had similar characteristics to patients with thrombus, but had less severe strokes. Slow-flow was not significantly associated with functional outcome or major adverse cardiovascular events, but was associated with recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke.