A European survey reveals that LAAO is mainly indicated for high-risk patients contraindicated for OACs, but highlights significant variability in complication rates among centers.
High periprocedural variability urges center selection caution for LAAO; leaves open standardization and volume-outcome questions.
The purpose of this EP Wire was to assess the indications, techniques, and outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in Europe. Thirty-three European centres, all members of the European Heart Rhythm Association electrophysiology (EP) research network, responded to this survey by completing the questionnaire. The major indication for LAAO (94%) was the prevention of stroke in patients at high thrombo-embolic risk (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2) and contraindications to oral anticoagulants (OACs). Twenty-one (64%) of the responding centres perform LAAO in their own institution and 80% implanted 30 or less LAAO devices in 2014. Two-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography was the preferred imaging technique to visualize LAA before, during, and after LAAO in 79, 58, and 62% of the participating centres, respectively. Following LAAO, 49% of the centres prescribe vitamin K antagonists or novel OACs. Twenty-five per cent of the centres combine LAAO with pulmonary vein isolation. The periprocedural complications included death (range, 0-3%), ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke (0-25%), tamponade (0-25%), and device embolization (0-20%). In conclusion, this EP Wire has demonstrated that LAAO is most commonly employed in patients at high thrombo-embolic risk in whom OAC is contraindicated. The technique is not yet very widespread and the complication rates remain significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pison et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: