Wang Jian-Long, Zhou Kuo, Qin Zheng, Cheng Wan-Jun, Zhang Ling-Zhi, Zhou Yu-Jie
Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Interventional Department, Luanzhou People's Hospital, Tangshan, China.
J Geriatr Cardiol. 2021 Nov 28;18(11):877-885. doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2021.11.001.
Tanscatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) closure and minimally invasive thoracoscopic LAA occlusion are local interventions of LAA for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, the safety and efficacy of these methods have not been compared. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of those two treatment approaches for stroke prevention in NVAF patients.
Two hundred and nine recurrent NVAF patients who received radiofrequency ablation were enrolled. These patients were treated with transcatheter LAA closure or thoracoscopic LAA occlusion. The patients were followed up from the first postoperative day and evaluated for efficacy endpoints (stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), systemic embolism (SE), and death) and a safety endpoint (bleeding events). Perioperative complications were recorded.
After a median follow-up of 1.8 years (383 patient-years), the overall rate of the composite efficacy endpoints was similar between the two groups (3.8 . 2.7 events per 100 patient-years; HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.225-2.237; = 0.559). However, regarding primary safety endpoint, there were 1.5 bleeding events per 100 patient-years in the thoracoscopic LAA occlusion group, compared with 6.4 in transcatheter LAA closure group (HR = 0.246; 95% CI: 0.074-0.819; = 0.022). The incidence of operative complications was 3/138 (2.17%) in thoracoscopic LAA occlusion group and 1/71 (1.41%) in transcatheter LAA closure group.
Thoracoscopic LAA occlusion and transcatheter LAA closure have similar efficacy in preventing stroke in NVAF patients. However, the thoracoscopic group had fewer bleeding events than the transcatheter group, but the former group required a longer hospital stay.
经导管左心耳(LAA)封堵术和微创胸腔镜LAA闭塞术是用于非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者预防卒中的LAA局部干预措施。然而,这些方法的安全性和有效性尚未得到比较。这项前瞻性队列研究旨在评估这两种治疗方法对NVAF患者预防卒中的安全性和有效性。
纳入209例接受射频消融的复发性NVAF患者。这些患者接受经导管LAA封堵术或胸腔镜LAA闭塞术治疗。从术后第一天开始对患者进行随访,并评估疗效终点(卒中/短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)、系统性栓塞(SE)和死亡)和安全性终点(出血事件)。记录围手术期并发症。
中位随访1.8年(383患者年)后,两组复合疗效终点的总体发生率相似(每100患者年3.8. 2.7事件;HR = 0.71;95%CI:0.225 - 2.237;P = 0.559)。然而,关于主要安全性终点,胸腔镜LAA闭塞组每100患者年有1.5次出血事件,而经导管LAA封堵组为6.4次(HR = 0.246;95%CI:0.074 - 0.819;P = 0.022)。胸腔镜LAA闭塞组手术并发症发生率为3/138(2.17%),经导管LAA封堵组为1/71(1.41%)。
胸腔镜LAA闭塞术和经导管LAA封堵术在预防NVAF患者卒中方面疗效相似。然而,胸腔镜组的出血事件比经导管组少,但前者住院时间更长。