» Articles » PMID: 30380015

Left Atrial Catheter Ablation in Patients with Previously Implanted Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices

Overview
Journal Europace
Date 2018 Nov 1
PMID 30380015
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aims: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is increasingly used as an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Feasibility and safety of left atrial (LA) catheter ablation (CA) in patients with previously implanted LAAC devices have not been well studied. We report on the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of LA CA in the presence of a previously implanted LAAC device.

Methods And Results: In this prospective cohort study consecutive patients that underwent LA CA with a previously implanted Watchman device were included. Periprocedural characteristics and long-term clinical follow-up were evaluated. Twenty-three LA CA procedures were performed in 19/162 AF patients with previously implanted Watchman devices [47% male, age 63.9 ± 6.2 years, CHA2DS2-VASc 4.0 (3.0-5.0); HASBLED 3.0 (2.0-4.0); 63% paroxysmal]. Left atrial CA was performed with irrigated radiofrequency (RF; n = 20, 87%) or phased RF (n = 3, 13%) in a mean of 18 months after LAAC implantation (range 4-80 months). Targets of CA consisted of pulmonary vein isolation (n = 19, 83%), superior vena cava isolation (n = 13, 57%), and additional linear lesions (n = 8, 35%). Procedures were carried out under vitamin K antagonist (VKA; n = 6, 26%), non-VKA OAC (NOAC; n = 8, 35%), or single antiplatelet therapy alone (n = 9, 39%). Left atrial CA was successful without any signs of interference from the device. Procedure-related complications were not observed. During a mean follow-up of 28 months, 11 patients (58%) had AF recurrence.

Conclusion: Left atrial CA after LAAC appears to be feasible, effective, and safe in this single centre cohort. Previously implanted Watchman device should not be a reason to relinquish CA in symptomatic AF patients, even in patients on single antiplatelet therapy alone.

Citing Articles

Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with prior left atrial appendage occlusion device.

Kewcharoen J, Shah K, Bhardwaj R, Contractor T, Ramsingh D, Turagam M J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024; .

PMID: 39256235 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-024-01914-8.


Catheter ablation alone versus catheter ablation with combined percutaneous left atrial appendage closure for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Junarta J, Siddiqui M, Abaza E, Zhang P, Roshandel A, Barbhaiya C J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024; 67(9):2147-2158.

PMID: 39230634 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-024-01915-7.


Long-term outcomes of left atrial appendage closure with or without concomitant pulmonary vein isolation:a propensity score matching analysis based on CLACBAC study.

Li X, Feng S, Ren Z, Wu J, Zhou L, Yang H BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2024; 24(1):85.

PMID: 38310248 PMC: 10837861. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03725-1.


Rhythm monitoring, success definition, recurrence, and anticoagulation after atrial fibrillation ablation: results from an EHRA survey.

Schwab A, Anic A, Farkowski M, Guerra J, Iliodromitis K, Jubele K Europace. 2022; 25(2):676-681.

PMID: 36372986 PMC: 9934999. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euac194.


Hospital outcomes of patients receiving catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation, left atrial appendage closure, or both.

Morcos R, Al Taii H, Rubens M, Saxena A, Ramamoorthy V, Hamed M J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022; 66(4):913-921.

PMID: 36114936 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01370-2.