Division of Cardiovascular Disease, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Mar;7(3):296-304. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.11.010.
The goal of this study was to provide a systematic review and analysis of observational studies on percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion for stroke prophylaxis in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).
A recent randomized controlled trial in patients with NVAF suggested noninferiority of percutaneous LAA occlusion versus medical management for stroke prevention. However, the use of percutaneous devices remains controversial because of limited literature on their efficacy and safety. We performed a systematic analytical review of existing observational studies to assess the rate of neurological events for patients treated with occlusion devices.
A comprehensive search of the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from inception through August 1, 2013, was conducted using pre-defined criteria. We included studies reporting implantation in at least 10 patients and a follow-up of 6 months or more.
In 17 eligible studies, a total of 1,052 devices were implanted in 1,107 patients with 1,586.4 person-years (PY) of follow-up. The adjusted incidence rate of stroke was 0.7/100 PY (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.3 to 1.1/100 PY), of transient ischemic attacks was 0.5/100 PY (95% CI: 0.1 to 1.8/100 PY), and of combined neurological events (strokes or transient ischemic attacks) was 1.1/100 PY (95% CI: 0.6 to 1.6/100 PY). Access site vascular complications and pericardial effusion were the most commonly observed procedural complications at a rate of 8.6% (95% CI: 6.3% to 11.7%) and 4.3% (95% CI: 3.1% to 5.9%), respectively.
Our systematic review suggested comparable efficacy of LAA occlusion devices compared with historical controls treated with adjusted-dose warfarin and other anticoagulation strategies for prevention of stroke in patients with NVAF.
本研究旨在对非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者经皮左心耳(LAA)封堵术预防卒中的观察性研究进行系统评价和分析。
最近一项 NVAF 患者的随机对照试验提示,经皮 LAA 封堵术在预防卒中方面不劣于药物治疗。然而,由于关于其疗效和安全性的文献有限,经皮器械的使用仍存在争议。我们对现有的观察性研究进行了系统分析性综述,以评估接受封堵器械治疗的患者发生神经事件的比率。
通过预先设定的标准,对 Medline、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库从建库起至 2013 年 8 月 1 日进行了全面检索。我们纳入了至少报告 10 例患者植入并随访 6 个月或以上的研究。
在 17 项符合条件的研究中,共有 1107 例患者共植入 1052 个器械,随访时间为 1586.4 人年。调整后的卒中发生率为 0.7/100 人年(95%可信区间[CI]:0.3 至 1.1/100 人年),短暂性脑缺血发作发生率为 0.5/100 人年(95%CI:0.1 至 1.8/100 人年),联合发生的神经事件(卒中和短暂性脑缺血发作)发生率为 1.1/100 人年(95%CI:0.6 至 1.6/100 人年)。血管入路并发症和心包积液是最常见的操作相关并发症,发生率分别为 8.6%(95%CI:6.3%至 11.7%)和 4.3%(95%CI:3.1%至 5.9%)。
本系统评价表明,LAA 封堵器械在预防 NVAF 患者卒中方面的疗效与接受调整剂量华法林和其他抗凝策略治疗的历史对照相比相似。