Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2022
Left atrial appendage closure with the II generation Ultraseal device: An international registry. The LIGATE study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Pivato Carlo A, Liccardo Gaetano, Sanz-Sanchez Jorge, Pelloni Elisa, Pujdak Krzysztof, Xuareb Robert G, Cruz-Gonzalez Ignacio, Pisano Francesco, Scotti Andrea, Tarantini Giuseppe, Cook Stephane, Regazzoli Damiano, Reimers Bernhard, Condorelli Gianluigi, Bragato Renato Maria, Stefanini Giulio G, Pagnotta Paolo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess feasibility and safety of second-generation left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) Ultraseal device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).
BACKGROUND: LAAC with first-generation Ultraseal device (Cardia, Eagan, Minnesota) has been shown to be a feasible therapeutic option in patients with NVAF. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the novel second-generation Ultraseal device.
METHODS: All patients with NVAF undergoing second-generation Ultraseal device implantation between February 2018 and September 2020 were included in a multicenter international registry. Periprocedural and post-discharge events were collected through 6-month follow-up. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were device success and technical success while primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse event (MAE) occurrence.
RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included: mean age 75 ± 8, 30.8% women, mean HAS-BLED 3 ± 1. The device was successfully implanted in all patients. Technical success was achieved in 50 patients (96.1%). In-hospital MAEs occurred in three patients (5.8%). The incidence of 6-month all-cause death and major bleeding was 11.6% and 2.1%, respectively. No strokes, transient ischemic attacks, systemic embolisms, or device embolization were reported after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation Ultraseal device implantation was associated with high success rates and a low incidence of peri-procedural complications. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to further evaluate the safety and the efficacy of this device, especially at long-term follow-up.
BACKGROUND: LAAC with first-generation Ultraseal device (Cardia, Eagan, Minnesota) has been shown to be a feasible therapeutic option in patients with NVAF. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the novel second-generation Ultraseal device.
METHODS: All patients with NVAF undergoing second-generation Ultraseal device implantation between February 2018 and September 2020 were included in a multicenter international registry. Periprocedural and post-discharge events were collected through 6-month follow-up. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were device success and technical success while primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse event (MAE) occurrence.
RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included: mean age 75 ± 8, 30.8% women, mean HAS-BLED 3 ± 1. The device was successfully implanted in all patients. Technical success was achieved in 50 patients (96.1%). In-hospital MAEs occurred in three patients (5.8%). The incidence of 6-month all-cause death and major bleeding was 11.6% and 2.1%, respectively. No strokes, transient ischemic attacks, systemic embolisms, or device embolization were reported after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation Ultraseal device implantation was associated with high success rates and a low incidence of peri-procedural complications. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to further evaluate the safety and the efficacy of this device, especially at long-term follow-up.