ABSTRACT
A patient underwent the LARIAT left atrial appendage (LAA) ligation procedurewith persistent atrial fibrillation history. The procedure was done successfully. A transthoracic echocardiography did not show pericardial effusion. The patient was examined under fluoroscopy where the tip of the drain was not in the pericardial space and contrast injection pericardial drain confirmed its location in the inferior vena cava.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Electrical isolation of the left atrial appendage (LAA) may provide incremental benefits for arrhythmia management in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of endocardial ablation and LAA exclusion with LARIAT device for electrical and mechanical exclusion of LAA. METHODS: We compared patients who underwent endocardial LAA isolation during index RFA for persistent AF and underwent a repeat RFA to patients who underwent LAA exclusion with LARIAT device followed by RFA for AF in this multicenter registry. Efficacy of electrical and mechanical isolation of LAA was assessed. RESULTS: We included 182 patients of which 91 patients underwent endocardial LAA isolation during RFA for AF, and 91 patients underwent LAA exclusion with LARIAT device followed by RFA for AF. Baseline characteristics were similar except for higher CHA2DS2-VASc score, coronary artery disease, and prior stroke rate in LARIAT arm. Persistence of electrical isolation (measured at beginning of second procedure) after LARIAT procedure was higher than one-time AF-RFA (96.7% vs 52.8%, p < 0.01). Acute pulmonary vein isolation rates were similar in both arms. AF recurrence rate after second isolation attempts at 1 year was similar in both arms. No difference in major complications was noted between both arms. CONCLUSIONS: LAA exclusion with LARIAT device appears to be more efficacious as compared to one-time endocardial ablation, but not compared to repeat isolation, in achieving complete electrical isolation of LAA for persistent AF.
Subject(s)
Atrial Appendage/surgery , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Radiofrequency Ablation/methods , Aged , Atrial Appendage/physiopathology , Atrial Fibrillation/physiopathology , Epicardial Mapping , Female , Humans , Ligation/instrumentation , Male , Patient Safety , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Selection of an appropriate antithrombotic regimen in patients requiring oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) still remains a challenge. An ideal 9-2regimen should balance the risk of bleeding against ischemic benefit. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search for studies comparing triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) vs double antithrombotic therapy (DAT) in patients requiring OAC undergoing PCI was performed in clinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO Services, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and various scientific conference sessions from inception to May 1st, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model to calculate risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Fifteen studies were eligible and included 13 967 patients, of which 7349 received TAT and 6618 received DAT. Compared with DAT, TAT was associated with lower risk of myocardial infarction (RR, 0.82; 95%CI, 0.69-0.98; P = .03) and stent thrombosis (RR, 0.66; 95%CI, 0.46-0.96; P = .03). There was no difference in risk of trial defined major adverse cardiac events, all-cause mortality, and stroke between two groups. Compared with DAT, TAT was associated with higher risk of trial defined major bleeding (RR, 1.67; 95%CI, 1.38-2.01; P < .00001), including thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding (RR, 1.81; 95%CI, 1.47-2.24; P < .00001) but no significant difference in risk of intracranial bleeding. CONCLUSION: In patients requiring OAC undergoing PCI, TAT was associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction but with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding when compared with DAT.
