Clinical outcome and intraprocedural characteristics of left atrial appendage occlusion: a comparison between single-occlusive plug-type and dual-occlusive disc-type devices

Abstract

Background: Percutaneous interventional left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a reliable, safe, and effective alternative for stroke prevention in selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: In a retrospective observational study, 149 patients underwent LAAO between 2016 and 2022 at the Department of Cardiology of the Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow, with AF for prevention of thromboembolic complications. We compared patient characteristics, intraoperative details and postoperative outcomes between single-occlusive plug-type (SOPT) and dual-occlusive disc-type (DODT) devices. Results: In all patients, the device implantation was successful. 60 patients received a SOPT occluder, including Watchman (35%) and Watchman FLX Occluders (65%), while 89 patients received a DODT occluder, including Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (37.1%), the Amplatzer Amulet (25.8%), and the LAmbre occluder (37.1%) systems. Procedure duration was significantly longer for DODT occluder implantation (49 ± 33 vs. 41 ± 25 min, p = 0.018). There were no in-hospital deaths or thromboembolic events reported after LAAO in both groups. Beyond that, a low rate of bleeding or access-side-related complications and pericardial tamponades were observed. Anticoagulation at discharge varied. About 60.8% of patients received dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge, and 33.1% received direct oral anticoagulants. A 6-month follow-up was obtained in 85% of the patients. All implanted devices were in the desired position. However, in 5.7% of the patients, a device-related thrombus formation was detected in the SOPT group, while no thrombus was seen in the DODT group (p = 0.11). Thromboembolic events were noticed in 3.1%, without any difference between the device types. There was a statistically non-significant trend for less residual device leaks after SOPT vs. DODT implantation (no leak in 71.7% vs. 62.2%, p = 0.07; minor leaks <5 mm, 9.4% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.1). In the SOPT group, less bleeding complications were reported after LAAO (11.3% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.1). Conclusion: Our data suggest the safety and efficiency of LAAO with a very high procedural implantation success rate irrespective of the used LAA device. Furthermore, no relevant procedural or device-related complication occurred during the 6-month follow-up in all patients.