Procedural and long-term thromboembolic outcomes after left atrial appendage closure: comparison of patients with reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.
Nicolas Majunke, Hamza El Hadi, Steffen Desch, Tobias Kister, Maria Buske, Natalie Fischer, Katharina Kirsch, Janine Pöss, Holger Thiele, Marcus Sandri
{"title":"Procedural and long-term thromboembolic outcomes after left atrial appendage closure: comparison of patients with reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.","authors":"Nicolas Majunke, Hamza El Hadi, Steffen Desch, Tobias Kister, Maria Buske, Natalie Fischer, Katharina Kirsch, Janine Pöss, Holger Thiele, Marcus Sandri","doi":"10.25270/jic/24.00347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on periprocedural complications and long-term thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with interventional left atrial appendage closure (LAAC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a retrospective single-center study, a total of 612 patients who underwent successful interventional LAAC were divided into 2 groups: 139 patients with reduced LVEF (less than 50%) and 473 patients with preserved LVEF (≥ 50%). Baseline characteristics, in-hospital procedural complications, and long-term thromboembolic events were compared between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients with reduced LVEF were more likely to be female with a higher CHA2DS2-VA-Score (median 5 vs 4; P less than .0001) and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (54% vs. 40%; P = .003) and coronary/peripheral artery disease (68% vs 41%; P less than .0001). There was no significant difference in procedure-related complications (major or minor bleeding [2.1% vs 4.2%; P = .44], access site complications [0% vs 4.2%; P = .08], cardiac tamponade [0.7% vs. 0.6%; P = .91], transient ischemic attack (TIA) [1.4% vs. 0.4%; P = .19], stroke [0% vs 0%], and in-hospital death [0% vs 0%]) between the 2 groups. Both groups had a similar median duration of long-term follow-up (20 vs 19 months, respectively; P = .15). During follow-up, there was no significant difference in the rates of TIA (2.2% vs 1.1%; P = .32), stroke (0.7% vs 1.9%; P = .33), or systemic thromboembolic events (0.7% vs 0.4%; P = .66) between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with reduced LVEF, the procedural safety of LAAC and the long-term rate of thromboembolic events were consistently low and comparable to patients with preserved LVEF.</p>","PeriodicalId":49261,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Invasive Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Invasive Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25270/jic/24.00347","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on periprocedural complications and long-term thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with interventional left atrial appendage closure (LAAC).
Methods: In a retrospective single-center study, a total of 612 patients who underwent successful interventional LAAC were divided into 2 groups: 139 patients with reduced LVEF (less than 50%) and 473 patients with preserved LVEF (≥ 50%). Baseline characteristics, in-hospital procedural complications, and long-term thromboembolic events were compared between the 2 groups.
Results: Patients with reduced LVEF were more likely to be female with a higher CHA2DS2-VA-Score (median 5 vs 4; P less than .0001) and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (54% vs. 40%; P = .003) and coronary/peripheral artery disease (68% vs 41%; P less than .0001). There was no significant difference in procedure-related complications (major or minor bleeding [2.1% vs 4.2%; P = .44], access site complications [0% vs 4.2%; P = .08], cardiac tamponade [0.7% vs. 0.6%; P = .91], transient ischemic attack (TIA) [1.4% vs. 0.4%; P = .19], stroke [0% vs 0%], and in-hospital death [0% vs 0%]) between the 2 groups. Both groups had a similar median duration of long-term follow-up (20 vs 19 months, respectively; P = .15). During follow-up, there was no significant difference in the rates of TIA (2.2% vs 1.1%; P = .32), stroke (0.7% vs 1.9%; P = .33), or systemic thromboembolic events (0.7% vs 0.4%; P = .66) between the 2 groups.
Conclusions: In patients with reduced LVEF, the procedural safety of LAAC and the long-term rate of thromboembolic events were consistently low and comparable to patients with preserved LVEF.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Invasive Cardiology will consider for publication suitable articles on topics pertaining to the invasive treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease.