Search

Atrial fibrillation is a major risk factor for stroke. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has emerged as an alternative to anticoagulation for patients with high risk of bleeding. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with adverse events after cardiac procedures. We sought to compare procedural and hospital outcomes in patients who underwent LAAC with and without DM. The Nationwide Inpatient Database was queried for patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAC between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. The primary outcome was all adverse events that included in-hospital death, acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, pericardial effusion, pericardial tamponade, pericardiocentesis, pericardial window, and postprocedural hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion. Analysis included 62,220 patients who underwent LAAC from 2016 to 2019; 34.9% of patients had DM. There was a slight increase in the percentage of patients who underwent LAAC who had DM during the study period, from 29.92% to 34.93%. In unadjusted and adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in all adverse events between patients with and without DM who underwent LAAC (9.18% vs 8.77%, respectively, adjusted p = 0.63), and no difference in length of stay. Patients with DM have higher risk of acute kidney injury (3.75 vs 1.96%, p <0.001). This nationwide retrospective study demonstrates that DM is not associated with an increase in adverse event rates in patients who underwent LAAC., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) require transseptal access; combining both in a single procedure may have advantages. However, the safety of this approach has not been extensively studied. The objective of this study was to compare in hospital outcomes among patients receiving CA, LAAC, and combination of both treatments on the same day., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of the National Inpatient Sample database. The primary outcome was the presence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) during index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included stroke, pericardial effusion, pericardiocentesis, and bleeding., Results: A total of 69,285 hospitalizations with AF were included in the analysis, of which 71.7% received LAAC, 27.8% received CA, and 0.5% received combination of both treatments on the same day. MACEE (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.39-6.70), stroke (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 0.55-16.01), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.07-1.41), pericardiocentesis (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.25-3.86), and bleeding (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 0.87-12.07) did not differ significantly between CA and combination treatment. Similarly, MACCE (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.28-4.41), stroke (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.24-4.35), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.11-1.90), pericardiocentesis (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.14-2.83), and bleeding (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 0.65-6.39) did not differ significantly between LAAC and combination treatment., Conclusions: The combined approach is infrequently used in clinical practice (< 1%). However, major life-threatening adverse events did not differ between CA and LAAC when performed in isolation or combined in a single procedural stage on the same day., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) is the preferred imaging modality to guide transcatheter left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has evolved as a less invasive alternative to TEE. Several observational studies have shown similar success rates and perioperative complications between TEE and ICE for LAAC., Objectives: We sought to examine the temporal trends and patient characteristics of TEE versus ICE use in LAAC using a national database. We also evaluated hospital outcomes including periprocedural complications, mortality, and length of hospital stay., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of data from the National Readmission Database, collected from 2016 to 2018. The primary outcome was major adverse events (MAE) defined as in-hospital mortality, cardiac arrest, pericardial effusion with or without tamponade, pericardiocentesis or window pericardiocentesis and pericardial window, pericardial effusion and tamponade, and hemorrhage requiring transfusion., Results: Trend analysis showed that TEE-guided LAAC increased from 96.6% in 2016 to 98.4% in 2018 (relative increase, 1.9%), while ICE-guided LAAC decreased from 3.4% to 1.6% during the same period (relative decrease, 53%, p for trend = 0.08). In the unmatched cohorts, the MAE was significantly lower in TEE-guided LAAC compared to ICE-guided LAAC (6.5% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.022). In the propensity score matching analysis, MAE remained significant (5.6% vs. 9.4%, p < 0.001). The incidence of pericardial effusion with or without tamponade remained significantly lower in the TEE group (2.3% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.001). Length of stay (3.4 vs. 1.9 days, p < 0.001) and hospitalization cost ($34,826 vs. $20,563, p < 0.001) remained significantly lower for TEE-guided LAAC., Conclusions: Compared to ICE, the incidence of MAE was significantly lower for TEE-guided LAAC, driven mainly by less pericardial effusion events. Large-scale randomized trials are needed to confirm the findings of the current and previous studies., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)