Key result
Intracardiac echocardiography for LAAO guidance yielded similar procedural success (OR 1.46; 95% CI 0.77-2.75) and a trend toward fewer complications (OR 0.57; P=0.07) compared to TOE.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of intracardiac echocardiography versus transoesophageal echocardiography for guidance of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion.
Does intracardiac echocardiography compared to transoesophageal echocardiography improve procedural success or reduce complications in patients undergoing percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,122)
Does intracardiac echocardiography compared to transoesophageal echocardiography improve procedural success or reduce complications in patients undergoing percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion?
Odds Ratio: 1.46 (95% CI 0.77–2.75)
p-value: p=0.24
Intracardiac echocardiography is a safe and effective alternative to transoesophageal echocardiography for guiding percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion, offering similar procedural success and a reduction in contrast media volume.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
ICE supports use as TEE alternative for LAAO with similar success and fewer complications trend; extends comparative evidence but needs dedicated RCTs.
Ribeiro et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis in percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (n=1,122). Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) vs. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) was evaluated on procedural success (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.77-2.75, p=0.24). Intracardiac echocardiography for LAAO guidance yielded similar procedural success (OR 1.46; 95% CI 0.77-2.75) and a trend toward fewer complications (OR 0.57; P=0.07) compared to TOE.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: