Background Epicardial placement of the left ventricular (LV) lead via a video‐assisted thoracoscopic (VAT) approach is an alternative to the standard transvenous technique. Hypothesis Long‐term safety and efficacy of VAT and transvenous LV lead implantation are comparable. To test it, we reviewed our experience and we compared the outcomes of patients who underwent implantation with the two techniques. Methods The VAT procedure is performed under general anesthesia, with oro‐tracheal intubation and right‐sided ventilation, and requires two 5 mm and one 15 mm thoracoscopic ports. After pericardiotomy at the spot of the epicardial target area, pacing measurements are taken and a spiral screw electrode is anchored at the final pacing site. The electrode is then tunneled to the pectoral pocket and connected to the device. Results 105 patients were referred to our center for epicardial LV lead implantation. After pre‐operative assessment, 5 patients were excluded because of concomitant conditions precluding surgery. The remaining 100 underwent the procedure. LV lead implantation was successful in all patients (median pacing threshold 0.8 ± 0.5 V, no phrenic nerve stimulation) and cardiac resynchronization therapy was established in all but one patient. The median procedure time was 75 min. During a median follow‐up of 24 months, there were no differences in terms of death, cardiovascular hospitalizations or device‐related complications vs the group of 100 patients who had undergone transvenous implantation. Patients of both groups displayed similar improvements in terms of ventricular reverse remodeling and functional status. Conclusions Our VAT approach proved safe and effective, and is a viable alternative in the case of failed transvenous LV implantation.
IntroductionThe most appropriate treatment for stroke prevention in standalone atrial fibrillation patients with a high CHADS2VASC score contraindicated for oral anticoagulation (OAC) or novel OAC (NOAC) still needs to be defined. Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure devices are available, but because of their endocardial positioning need a period of antiplatelet therapy (APT). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of epicardial left atrial appendage clipping in patients contraindicated for (N)OAC and APT.Methods and ResultsWe describe a standalone totally thoracoscopic LAA clipping of forty‐five consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF; 32 males; age, 73.1 ± 7.4 years; CHADVASC, 6.5 ± 1.1; HAS‐BLED 4.9 ± 0.9) with absolute contraindications to (N)OAC. The patients were selected by a multidisciplinary Heart Team. Sixty percent had a previous ischemic stroke and 51% a history of the hemorrhagic event and 22% both. All patients were implanted with an LAA epicardial clip, guided by preoperative computed tomography and intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography. The mean procedural duration was 52.3 ± 12.6 minutes with postprocedural extubation interval of 22.8 ± 14.6 minutes. No procedure‐related complications occurred. Intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed complete LAA occlusion in all patients. At a mean follow‐up of 16.4 ± 9.1 months (range, 2‐34), with all patients off (N)OAC or APT, no ischemic stroke or hemorrhagic complications occurred. computed tomography or TEE at follow‐up demonstrated a correct LAA occlusion in all with mean stumps of 3.3 ± 2.8 mm.ConclusionThoracoscopic epicardial closure of the LAA with the AtriClip PRO2 device is a potentially safe and efficient treatment for stroke prevention in patients with NVAF contraindicated for anticoagulant therapy or APT.
Background: Left atrial appendage occlusion is an increasingly proposed treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation and poor tolerance to anticoagulants. All endovascular devices require antithrombotic therapy. Anatomical and clinical variables predisposing to device-related thrombosis, as well as post-procedural peri-device leaks, could mandate the continuation or reintroduction of aggressive antithrombotic treatment. Because of the absence of foreign material inside the heart, epicardial appendage closure possibly does not necessitate antithrombotic therapy, but data of large series are missing. Methods: Multidisciplinary team evaluation for standalone totally thoracoscopic epicardial appendage closure was done in 180 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation and poor tolerance to antithrombotic therapy. One hundred and fifty-two patients consented (male 66.1%, mean age 76.1 ± 7.4, CHA2DS2VASc mean 5.3 ± 1.6, HASBLED mean 3.8 ± 1.1). Indications were cerebral hemorrhage (48%), gastro-intestinal bleeding (33.3%), and other bleeding (20.7%). No antithrombotic therapy was prescribed from the day of surgery to the latest follow up. Results: Procedural success was 98.7%. At a mean follow up of 38.2 ± 18.8 months, cardioembolic and bleeding events were 1.3% and 0.6%, respectively. Among patients with a history of blood transfusions (41.1%), none needed further transfusions or treatment post procedure. Conclusion: Epicardial appendage occlusion without any antithrombotic therapy appears to be safe and effective. This strategy could be advised when minimization of bleeding risk concomitant to stroke prevention is needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.