Single Fluoroscopy Versus Transesophageal Echocardiogram: A Comparative Evaluation for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion With LACbes Device

Objectives

This study was aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of fluoroscopy as an intraprocedural guidance method during left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) using the LACbes device.

Methods

The study included a cohort of 477 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent LAAO. The cohort was divided into two groups: a retrospective group of 240 patients who underwent standard procedures involving both transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) and fluoroscopy and a prospective group of 237 patients who only underwent fluoroscopy. The retrospective cohort was analyzed for device positioning, anchoring, compression, and peridevice leak (PDL) using both TEE and fluoroscopy to provide detailed insights for potential application in the prospective cohort. Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in left atrial appendage (LAA) characteristics and other echocardiographic parameters between the two groups. Although the prospective group had a higher prevalence of implantation failure and more deployment attempts per procedure, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Notable differences were observed in fluoroscopy and operation times. Specifically, the prospective group had longer fluoroscopy times and more deployment attempts per procedure but shorter overall operation times compared to the retrospective group. Additionally, patients in the prospective group had shorter hospital stays and lower hospitalization costs. Periprocedural and 2-year follow-up complications were comparable between both cohorts, with no statistically significant differences observed in pericardial effusion, peripheral vascular complications, survival, cardiac death, PDL, or device thrombus.

Conclusions

The use of fluoroscopy as the sole guidance modality for LAAO with the LACbes device demonstrated promising results in terms of efficacy and safety. It emerges as a viable and cost-effective alternative, offering a more efficient approach for LAAO.