Key result
Computed tomography for left atrial appendage occlusion planning was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk of 4-5 mm peripheral leaks compared to transesophageal echocardiography (RR 0.500).
Why the study?
The role of contrast-enhanced cardiac CT for preoperative assessment and postoperative control in LAAO has not been sufficiently studied compared to TEE.
Does contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography improve preoperative assessment and reduce peripheral leakage compared to transesophageal echocardiography in patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion?
Cohort (n=38)
Yes
Does contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography improve preoperative assessment and reduce peripheral leakage compared to transesophageal echocardiography in patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion?
Relative Risk: 0.5 (95% CI 0.06–3.71)
Absolute Event Rate: 5.3% vs 10.5%
Contrast-enhanced cardiac CT provides larger LAA measurements than TEE and can detect incomplete device endothelialization, potentially reducing peripheral leakage risk and influencing postoperative antithrombotic therapy.
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is reported to be one of the main etiological factors of ischemic stroke. Transcatheter occlusion of the left atrial appendage (LAAO) is an alternative to anticoagulant therapy in the thromboembolism prevention in atrial fibrillation patients with a high bleeding risk. The role of contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography (CT) for preoperative assessment and postoperative control has not been sufficiently studied to the present moment. Objective: Comparison of the possibilities of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and computed tomography in pre- and postoperative imaging in the context of LAAO interventions. Material and methods : This retrospective cohort study included 38 patients divided into 2 groups: in the first group TEE was used for intervention planning and postoperative control, patients of the second group were examined with CT. The indicators obtained during LAA measurements were assessed, as well as the result of the intervention – according to the risk of peripheral leakage into the left atrial appendage. Results: The average left atrial appendage depth and orifice diameter according to transesophageal echocardiography were significantly smaller compared to computed tomography data (25.58 ± 4.65 versus 31.05 ± 6.41, p = 0.011; 17.21 ± 2.70 versus 18.55 ± 3.05 p = 0,006, respectively). In the computed tomography group, there was a not statistically significant trend towards a lower risk of leakage for 4–5 mm leaks (RR = 0.500; 95% CI 0.060–3.710) and for 2–3 mm leaks (RR = 0.500; 95% CI 0.150–1.540). In addition, 45 days after the intervention computed tomography revealed 5 cases of incomplete endothelialization of the device with the contrast agent leak into the LAA in the absence of peripheral leakage. Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography, unlike transesophageal echocardiography, allows to detect incomplete occlusive device endothelialization, which may influence the choice of postoperative antithrombotic therapy. The use of computed tomography in an intervention planning for the LAAO may reduce the risk of peripheral leakage, however, this hypothesis needs to be confirmed in studies with a larger number of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Petriy et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=38). Computed tomography (CT) vs. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was evaluated on Risk of 4-5 mm peripheral leakage (RR 0.500, 95% CI 0.060-3.710). Computed tomography for left atrial appendage occlusion planning was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk of 4-5 mm peripheral leaks compared to transesophageal echocardiography (RR 0.500).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: