2016 Volume 80 Issue 5 Pages 1123-1130
Background:The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome after left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion in real clinical practice and compare between Amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP) and Watchman.Methods and Results:From October 2010 to February 2015, 96 successful LAA occlusion procedures were performed using either ACP (n=50) or Watchman device (n=46) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients (59 male; age, 65.1±9.4 years; CHADS2, 2.5±1.2; CHA2DS2-VASC, 3.9±1.6; HAS-BLED, 2.7±1.3). The procedure success rate was 96.8%. There were serious complications in 4 patients (4.1%; 2 cardiac tamponade, 1 device embolization, and 1 major bleed). The anticoagulation cessation rate after 6 weeks was 92.7%. During mean 21.9-month follow-up, the incidence of death, stroke, systemic embolization and major bleeding was 5.2%, 4.2%, 0% and 1.0%, respectively. On transesophageal echocardiography of 93 patients within 6 months after the procedure, 24 residual leaks were observed (25.8%; 2 mild, 18 moderate, and 4 major). Clinical outcome was similar for the 2 devices, but peridevice leakage was more frequent with the Watchman than the ACP.Conclusions:LAA occlusion was feasible in non-valvular AF patients with high risk of stroke and hemorrhage. The ACP and Watchman devices were similar in terms of procedural and clinical outcomes. (Circ J 2016; 80: 1123–1130)
