Journal of the neurological sciences · 2025
The safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure devices in patients with non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu Michael, Coburn Ryan, Koriesh Ahmed, Wang Han, Graff-Radford Jonathan, Killu Ammar, Sularz Agata, Yang Eric H, Arsanjani Reza, Pollak Peter, O'Cochlain Fearghas, Vaidya Vaibhav, Singh Gurpreet, Simard Trevor, Alkhouli Mohamad, Brown Robert D, Holmes David, Scharf Eugene
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) presents with challenges when balancing the risk of recurrent bleeding vs ischemic stroke. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices have shown promise as a minimally invasive method to prevent stroke without long-term anticoagulation. The goal of our study is to evaluate the efficacy of LAAC devices in patients with non-traumatic ICH and intraspinal hemorrhage which has not been well studied.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis on patients who had a history of atrial fibrillation and ICH/intraspinal hemorrhage was performed. The primary outcome was the development of new hemorrhage or ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications and mortality.
RESULTS: 103 patients were included with a mean follow-up time of 1341 ± 764 days. All patients had successful LAAC placement. 7 patients developed periprocedural complications including groin hematoma, stroke, and pericarditis. 43 had a peri-device leak of any size including 3 device related thrombus. 11 patients suffered a new ischemic stroke with an annualized incidence rate of 2.9 % and 6 suffered a recurrent hemorrhage with an annualized incidence rate of 1.6 %. Those who suffered a new stroke were more likely to have a history of prior stroke (p = 0.04) and had a larger peri-device leak (4.3 vs 2.7 mm, p = 0.04). There was no difference in patient characteristics in those who suffered an ICH.
CONCLUSION: LAAC devices appear to be a safe and effective alternative to anticoagulation in patients with a history of nontraumatic ICH or intraspinal hemorrhage.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis on patients who had a history of atrial fibrillation and ICH/intraspinal hemorrhage was performed. The primary outcome was the development of new hemorrhage or ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications and mortality.
RESULTS: 103 patients were included with a mean follow-up time of 1341 ± 764 days. All patients had successful LAAC placement. 7 patients developed periprocedural complications including groin hematoma, stroke, and pericarditis. 43 had a peri-device leak of any size including 3 device related thrombus. 11 patients suffered a new ischemic stroke with an annualized incidence rate of 2.9 % and 6 suffered a recurrent hemorrhage with an annualized incidence rate of 1.6 %. Those who suffered a new stroke were more likely to have a history of prior stroke (p = 0.04) and had a larger peri-device leak (4.3 vs 2.7 mm, p = 0.04). There was no difference in patient characteristics in those who suffered an ICH.
CONCLUSION: LAAC devices appear to be a safe and effective alternative to anticoagulation in patients with a history of nontraumatic ICH or intraspinal hemorrhage.