Real-world experience comparing two common left atrial appendage closure devices.

BACKGROUND: The interventional left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a guideline-conform alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients with OAC ineligibility. It was aimed to directly compare two contemporary devices in a real-world patient population. METHODS: LAAC was conducted in two centres between 2010 and 2014 as well as between 2014 and 2017, respectively, in a standard fashion based on the specific manufacturer's recommendations. Baseline characteristics, procedural data and event rates during intra-hospital and 6 months follow-up were registered in a retrospective approach, and analysed in device-related groups. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients presented for LAAC device implantation. Baseline characteristics were mostly evenly distributed. In 148 patients, a Watchman™ device (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) was successfully implanted, an Amplatzer™ Amulet™ (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) in 34 patients (96.1 and 97.1%, respectively; p = 1.00). Major access site bleedings were more frequent in the Amplatzer™ Amulet™ group (8.9 versus 1.4%; p = 0.046). No intra-hospital thromboembolic event was present. During 6 months follow-up, peri-device leaks > 5 mm and thromboembolic events were uncommon (each p = n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: While procedural success was equally high with both contemporary devices, complications during follow-up were rare, and evenly distributed.

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in proximal (type A) aortic dissection: Ready for a broader application?

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has demonstrated encouraging results and is gaining increasing acceptance as a treatment option for aortic aneurysms and dissections. Yet, its role in managing proximal aortic pathologies is unknown-this is important because in proximal (Stanford type A) aortic dissections, 10% to 30% are not accepted for surgery and 30% to 50% are technically amenable for TEVAR. We describe our case series of type A aortic dissections treated by using TEVAR. METHODS: Between year 2009 and 2016, 12 patients with acute, subacute, or chronic type A aortic dissection with the proximal entry tear located between the coronaries and brachiocephalic artery were treated with TEVAR at 3 centers. Various stent-graft configurations were used to seal the proximal entry tear in the ascending aorta under rapid pacing. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients (9 male, 3 female), mean age 81 ± 7 years, EuroSCORE II 9.1 ± 4.5, underwent TEVAR for the treatment of type A aortic dissection. Procedural success was achieved in 11 of 12 patients (91.7%). There was 1 minor stroke and 1 intraprocedural death. No additional deaths were reported at 30 days. At 36 months, there were 4 further deaths (all from nonaortic causes). The mean survival of these 4 deceased was 23 months (range 15-36 months). Follow-up computed tomography demonstrated favorable aortic remodeling. CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR is feasible and reveals promising early results in selected patients with type A aortic dissection who are poor candidates for surgical repair. The current iteration of stent-graft technology, however, needs to be adapted to features specific to the ascending aorta.