Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, MercyOne North Iowa Medical Center, 1000 4th St SW, Mason City, IA 50401, USA.
Division of Haematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, UMass Chan-Baystate, 759 Chestnut St, Springfield, MA 01199, USA.
Europace. 2023 Feb 16;25(2):390-399. doi: 10.1093/europace/euac181.
The safety and feasibility of combining percutaneous catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as a single procedure in the USA have not been investigated. We analyzed the US National Readmission Database (NRD) to investigate the incidence of combined LAAO + CA and compare major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) with matched LAAO-only and CA-only patients.
In this retrospective study from NRD data, we identified patients undergoing combined LAAO and CA procedures on the same day in the USA from 2016 to 2019. A 1:1 propensity score match was performed to identify patients undergoing LAAO-only and CA-only procedures. The number of LAAO + CA procedures increased from 28 (2016) to 119 (2019). LAAO + CA patients (n = 375, mean age 74 ± 9.2 years, 53.4% were males) had non-significant higher MACE (8.1%) when compared with LAAO-only (n = 407, 5.3%) or CA-only patients (n = 406, 7.4%), which was primarily driven by higher rate of pericardial effusion (4.3%). All-cause 30-day readmission rates among LAAO + CA patients (10.7%) were similar when compared with LAAO-only (12.7%) or CA-only (17.5%) patients. The most frequent primary reason for readmissions among LAAO + CA and LAAO-only cohorts was heart failure (24.6 and 31.5%, respectively), while among the CA-only cohort, it was paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (25.7%).
We report an 63% annual growth (from 28 procedures) in combined LAAO and CA procedures in the USA. There were no significant difference in MACE and all-cause 30-day readmission rates among LAAO + CA patients compared with matched LAAO-only or CA-only patients.
在美国,尚未研究经皮导管消融(CA)联合左心耳封堵(LAAO)作为单一程序治疗房颤的安全性和可行性。我们分析了美国国家再入院数据库(NRD),以调查联合 LAAO+CA 的发生率,并与匹配的 LAAO 仅和 CA 仅患者比较主要不良心血管事件(MACE)。
在这项来自 NRD 数据的回顾性研究中,我们在美国确定了 2016 年至 2019 年同一天接受联合 LAAO 和 CA 治疗的患者。采用 1:1 倾向评分匹配来识别仅接受 LAAO 和仅接受 CA 治疗的患者。LAAO+CA 治疗患者的数量从 2016 年的 28 例增加到 2019 年的 119 例。与 LAAO 仅治疗患者(n=407,5.3%为男性)或 CA 仅治疗患者(n=406,7.4%)相比,LAAO+CA 患者(n=375,平均年龄 74±9.2 岁,53.4%为男性)的 MACE(8.1%)无显著升高,这主要是由更高的心包积液发生率(4.3%)引起的。与 LAAO 仅治疗患者(12.7%)或 CA 仅治疗患者(17.5%)相比,LAAO+CA 患者的 30 天全因再入院率(10.7%)相似。LAAO+CA 和 LAAO 仅治疗组中最常见的再入院主要原因是心力衰竭(分别为 24.6%和 31.5%),而 CA 仅治疗组中则是阵发性房颤(25.7%)。
我们报告了美国联合 LAAO 和 CA 治疗的数量每年增长 63%(从 28 例增加到 45 例)。与匹配的 LAAO 仅或 CA 仅患者相比,LAAO+CA 患者的 MACE 和 30 天全因再入院率无显著差异。