Feasibility and Safety of Intracardiac Echocardiography Use in Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Closure Procedures

BackgroundLeft atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is usually performed under the guidance of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Data on the safety of intracardiac echocardiogram (ICE)–guided LAAC from a real-world population in the United States remain limited. In this study, the aim was to evaluate the trends and outcomes of ICE-guided LAAC procedures using the US National Inpatient Sample.MethodsThis study used the National Inpatient Sample database from quarter 4 of 2015 to 2019. We used a propensity-matched analysis and adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital outcomes/complications. A P value of <.05 was considered significant.ResultsWe identified 61,995 weighted LAAC cases. Of these, 1410 patients had ICE-guided LAAC with a lower median age than the patients who had TEE-guided LAAC (75 vs 77 years; P ≤ .01). The use of ICE-guided LAAC increased from 1.7% in 2015 to 2.2% in 2019 (Ptrend = .75). Major, cardiovascular, neurologic, and pulmonary complications were similar for ICE-guided and TEE-guided LAAC on adjusted analysis. On propensity-matched analysis, the overall vascular complication rates were similar. However, retroperitoneal bleeding remained significantly higher (0.7% vs 0%) with ICE. Gastrointestinal bleeding complications were more frequent in TEE-guided LAAC (3.5% vs 2.1%). The length of stay was similar for both groups (median = 1 day; P = .23); however, ICE was associated with $1769 excess cost of hospitalization ($25,112 vs $23,343; P = .04).ConclusionsICE–guided LAAC is safer than TEE-guided LAAC, with similar rates of major complications. However, ICE use was associated with lower rates of gastrointestinal bleeding and higher rates of retroperitoneal bleeding. In addition, ICE-guided LAAC is associated with a similar length of stay but higher costs of hospitalization.