Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure: access via transseptal puncture versus patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect.

Kleinecke, Caroline; Fuerholz, Monika; Buffle, Eric; de Marchi, Stefano; Schnupp, Steffen; Brachmann, Johannes; Nietlispach, Fabian; Fankhauser, Mate; Streit, Samuel R; Windecker, Stephan; Meier, Bernhard; Gloekler, Steffen (2020). Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure: access via transseptal puncture versus patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect. EuroIntervention, 16(2), e173-e180. Europa Digital & Publishing 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00442

[img] Text
58_31449043 Amplatzer left atrial appendage closure.pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to registered users only
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (2MB)

AIMS

To compare periprocedural and late clinical outcomes of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) with Amplatzer devices by access through transseptal puncture (TSP) versus a patent foramen ovale (PFO) or an atrial septal defect (ASD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between 2009 and 2018, 578 consecutive patients underwent LAAC via TSP or PFO/ASD access in three centers. After a 1:3 propensity score matching, 246 (TSP) vs 246 (PFO/ASD) patients were compared by use of the primary efficacy endpoint of all-cause stroke, systemic embolism and cardiovascular/unexplained death and the primary safety endpoint of major peri-procedural complications and major bleedings at follow-up. Mean age was 75.2±8.7 (TSP) vs 74.4±10.9 (PFO/ASD) years, CHA2DS2-VASc score 4.5±1.6 vs 4.3±1.4, and HAS-BLED score 3.3±1.0 vs 3.3±0.9. Device success (97.6% vs 97.8%, p=0.90) was similar. After 2.5±1.4 vs 2.6±1.6 years, clinical efficacy (46/603, 7.6% [TSP] vs 21/233, 9.0% [PFO/ASD], 10.3, hazard ratio (HR), 1.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-0.85, p=0.54) and safety (24/603, 4.0% vs 11/233, 4.7%; HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.52-3.6, p=0.49) did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a PFO/ASD access for LAAC with Amplatzer devices offers similar periprocedural and late clinical outcomes as TSP. Simultaneous PFO/ASD closure for an additional protective benefit does not increase risk.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Cardiovascular Disorders (DHGE) > Clinic of Cardiology

UniBE Contributor:

Fürholz, Monika, Buffle, Eric Jacques, De Marchi, Stefano, Windecker, Stephan

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

1774-024X

Publisher:

Europa Digital & Publishing

Language:

English

Submitter:

Nadia Biscozzo

Date Deposited:

10 Feb 2020 15:00

Last Modified:

05 Dec 2022 15:35

Publisher DOI:

10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00442

PubMed ID:

31449043

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.139090

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/139090

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback