27 research outputs found

    Management and outcomes of patients with left atrial appendage thrombus prior to percutaneous closure

    Get PDF
    Altres ajuts: Fundación Interhospitalaria para la Investigación Cardiovascular (FIC Foundation); Abbott.Objective: Left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus has heretofore been considered a contraindication to percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC). Data regarding its management are very limited. The aim of this study was to analyse the medical and invasive treatment of patients referred for LAAC in the presence of LAA thrombus. Methods: This multicentre observational registry included 126 consecutive patients referred for LAAC with LAA thrombus on preprocedural imaging. Treatment strategies included intensification of antithrombotic therapy (IAT) or direct LAAC. The primary and secondary endpoints were a composite of bleeding, stroke and death at 18 months, and procedural success, respectively. Results: IAT was the preferred strategy in 57.9% of patients, with total thrombus resolution observed in 60.3% and 75.3% after initial and subsequent IAT, respectively. Bleeding complications and stroke during IAT occurred in 9.6% and 2.9%, respectively, compared with 3.8% bleeding and no embolic events in the direct LAAC group before the procedure. Procedural success was 90.5% (96.2% vs 86.3% in direct LAAC and IAT group, respectively, p=0.072), without cases of in-hospital thromboembolic complications. The primary endpoint occurred in 29.3% and device-related thrombosis was found in 12.8%, without significant difference according to treatment strategy. Bleeding complications at 18 months occurred in 22.5% vs 10.5% in the IAT and direct LAAC group, respectively (p=0.102). Conclusion: In the presence of LAA thrombus, IAT was the initial management strategy in half of our cohort, with initial thrombus resolution in 60% of these, but with a relatively high bleeding rate (∼10%). Direct LAAC was feasible, with high procedural success and absence of periprocedural embolic complications. However, a high rate of device-related thrombosis was detected during follow-up

    Accounting for the mortality benefit of drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention: a comparison of methods in a retrospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce rates of restenosis compared with bare metal stents (BMS). A number of observational studies have also found lower rates of mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction with DES compared with BMS, findings not observed in randomized clinical trials. In order to explore reasons for this discrepancy, we compared outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES or BMS by multiple statistical methods.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We compared short-term rates of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction for patients undergoing PCI with DES or BMS using propensity-score adjustment, propensity-score matching, and a stent-era comparison in a large, integrated health system between 1998 and 2007. For the propensity-score adjustment and stent era comparisons, we used multivariable logistic regression to assess the association of stent type with outcomes. We used McNemar's Chi-square test to compare outcomes for propensity-score matching.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between 1998 and 2007, 35,438 PCIs with stenting were performed among health plan members (53.9% DES and 46.1% BMS). After propensity-score adjustment, DES was associated with significantly lower rates of death at 30 days (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.63, <it>P </it>< 0.001) and one year (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.49 - 0.68, <it>P </it>< 0.001), and a lower rate of myocardial infarction at one year (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 - 0.87, <it>P </it>< 0.001). Thirty day and one year mortality were also lower with DES after propensity-score matching. However, a stent era comparison, which eliminates potential confounding by indication, showed no difference in death or myocardial infarction for DES and BMS, similar to results from randomized trials.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Although propensity-score methods suggested a mortality benefit with DES, consistent with prior observational studies, a stent era comparison failed to support this conclusion. Unobserved factors influencing stent selection in observational studies likely account for the observed mortality benefit of DES not seen in randomized clinical trials.</p

    Impact of operatoŕs experience on peri-procedural outcomes with Watchman FLX: Insights from the FLX-SPA registry

    Get PDF
    Background: The Watchman FLX is a device upgrade of the Watchman 2.5 that incorporates several design enhancements intended to simplify left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) and improve procedural outcomes. This study compares peri-procedural results of LAAO with Watchman FLX (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) in centers with varying degrees of experience with the Watchman 2.5 and Watchman FLX. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, 'real-world' registry including consecutive patients undergoing LAAO with the Watchman FLX at 26 Spanish sites (FLX-SPA registry). Implanting centers were classified according to the center's prior experience with the Watchman 2.5. A further division of centers according to whether or not they had performed ≤ 10 or > 10Watchman FLX implants was prespecified at the beginning of the study. Procedural outcomes of institutions stratified according to their experience with the Watchman 2.5 and FLX devices were compared. Results: 359 patients [mean age 75.5 (SD8.1), CHA2DS2-VASc 4.4 (SD1.4), HAS-BLED 3.8(SD0.9)] were included. Global success rate was 98.6%, successful LAAO with the first selected device size was achieved in 95.5% patients and the device was implanted at first attempt in 78.6% cases. There were only 9(2.5%) major peri-procedural complications. No differences in efficacy or safety results according to the centeŕs previous experience with Watchman 2.5 and procedural volume with Watchman FLX existed. Conclusions: The Watchman FLX attains high procedural success rates with complete LAA sealing in unselected, real-world patients, along with a low incidence of peri-procedural complications, regardless of operatoŕs experience with its previous device iteration or the number of Watchman FLX devices implanted

    Management and outcomes of patients with left atrial appendage thrombus prior to percutaneous closure.

    Get PDF
    Left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus has heretofore been considered a contraindication to percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC). Data regarding its management are very limited. The aim of this study was to analyse the medical and invasive treatment of patients referred for LAAC in the presence of LAA thrombus. This multicentre observational registry included 126 consecutive patients referred for LAAC with LAA thrombus on preprocedural imaging. Treatment strategies included intensification of antithrombotic therapy (IAT) or direct LAAC. The primary and secondary endpoints were a composite of bleeding, stroke and death at 18 months, and procedural success, respectively. IAT was the preferred strategy in 57.9% of patients, with total thrombus resolution observed in 60.3% and 75.3% after initial and subsequent IAT, respectively. Bleeding complications and stroke during IAT occurred in 9.6% and 2.9%, respectively, compared with 3.8% bleeding and no embolic events in the direct LAAC group before the procedure. Procedural success was 90.5% (96.2% vs 86.3% in direct LAAC and IAT group, respectively, p=0.072), without cases of in-hospital thromboembolic complications. The primary endpoint occurred in 29.3% and device-related thrombosis was found in 12.8%, without significant difference according to treatment strategy. Bleeding complications at 18 months occurred in 22.5% vs 10.5% in the IAT and direct LAAC group, respectively (p=0.102). In the presence of LAA thrombus, IAT was the initial management strategy in half of our cohort, with initial thrombus resolution in 60% of these, but with a relatively high bleeding rate (~10%). Direct LAAC was feasible, with high procedural success and absence of periprocedural embolic complications. However, a high rate of device-related thrombosis was detected during follow-up

    Anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy use in 426 patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and stent implantation implications for bleeding risk and prognosis

    Get PDF
    ObjectivesThis study was designed to review outcomes in relation to antithrombotic therapy management strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting.BackgroundThere is limited evidence on the optimal antithrombotic therapy management strategies for patients with AF who undergo PCI with stenting.MethodsWe reviewed 426 patients (70.9% men, mean age 71.5 ± 8.5 years) with AF undergoing PCI with stenting between 2001 and 2006. We recorded clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients, stroke risk factors, and antithrombotic therapy use before PCI and at discharge. Clinical follow-up was performed, and all bleeding episodes, thromboembolism, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (i.e., death, acute myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) were recorded.ResultsThe most commonly associated comorbidities were hypertension (74.5%), diabetes mellitus (40.2%), chronic renal failure (14.9%), and congestive heart failure (26.7%); 80% of patients had ≥2 stroke risk factors. Of the drugs prescribed at discharge, aspirin plus clopidogrel were used in 174 patients (40.8%), whereas 213 patients (50%) were discharged with triple therapy (coumarins, aspirin, and clopidogrel). Complete follow-up was achieved in 87.5% (median 594 days; range 0 to 2,190). The incidence of adverse events was high (36.6%), with major bleeding in 12.3%, thromboembolic events in 4.2%, and MACE in 32.3%. All-cause mortality was high (22.6%). In a multivariate analysis, non-anticoagulation with coumarins increased mortality (17.8% vs. 27.8%; hazard ratio [HR] = 3.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.61 to 7.54; p = 0.002) and MACE (26.5% vs. 38.7%; HR = 4.9; 95% CI 2.17 to 11.1; p < 0.01) In a Cox-regression analysis, non-anticoagulation (p < 0.01) and age (p = 0.02) were independent predictors of MACE.ConclusionsPatients with AF undergoing PCI with stenting represent a high-risk population because of age, comorbidities, and presence of stroke risk factors. These patients have a high mortality and MACE rate, which is reduced by anticoagulation therapy
    corecore