Zero-contrast left atrial appendage closure, a feasible alternative for patients with a high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to reduce thrombotic risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. This procedure conventionally requires the use of a contrast agent. A significant proportion of patients who undergo this procedure have chronic kidney disease, with a high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically review existing literature regarding the feasibility and safety of a zero-contrast LAAC technique.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for studies comparing a zero-contrast LAAC technique with conventional LAAC up to April 2024. From each study, we extracted baseline characteristics, feasibility, and safety outcomes. A random model meta-analysis was used to compare outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

Five studies reporting data from 367 patients were included. A 100% successful implantation rate was reported in all the zero-contrast groups. The mean number of recaptures reached no significant difference between the groups (mean difference, -0.15; CI, -0.67 to 0.37; I2 = 0%; P = .58). The zero-contrast group had a significantly shorter fluoroscopy time (mean difference, -4.03; CI, -7.72 to -0.34; I2 = 67%; P = .03). Complications related to the procedure, peridevice leak, and device-associated thrombus rates were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Zero-contrast LAAC is a feasible alternative. The success and complication rates are consistent with those of conventional LAAC. Aside from the inherent benefit of zero-contrast exposure, this technique allows a reduction in fluoroscopy time.