ObjectivesAccurate sizing of the left atrial appendage (LAA) is essential when performing percutaneous LAA closure. This study aimed to compare different LAA imaging modalities and sizing methods in order to obtain successful LAA closure.BackgroundPercutaneous LAA closure is an increasingly used treatment strategy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. LAA sizing has typically been done by 2D-transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE).MethodsPatients who had a preprocedural TEE and preprocedural and postprocedural multislice CT (MSCT) were identified. Preprocedural measurements of LAA ostia and landing zones by 2D-TEE, MSCT and angiography were collected and analysed for those patients with successful LAA closure - i.e. with no contrast leakage at 3-month follow-up MSCT.ResultsThe study population (n=67) had a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 3.0 and HAS-BLED score of 2.7. Fifty-eight patients (87%) were identified to have successful LAA closure. Based on MSCT, 48 LAA sizings (83%) resulted in a correct LAA closure device size selection, whereas with 2D-TEE sizing, only 33 measurements (57%) would have resulted in a correct device size selection (p<0.01). Using adapted Bland-Altman method, MSCT-based perimeter-derived mean diameter was shown to be the best parameter to guide LAA device size selection for ‘closed-end’ devices (Amulet, WatchmanFLX), whereas the maximal diameter was the best parameter for the ‘open-end’ Watchman device.ConclusionsPreprocedural MSCT-based LAA closure device size selection proves to be a more accurate method than conventional 2D-TEE-based sizing. Depending on the LAA closure device design, perimeter-derived mean diameter or maximal diameter could be the better sizing method.

No abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established therapeutic option for patients with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis. The optimal treatment strategy for concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been tested prospectively in a randomized clinical trial. This study aimed to describe the degree of CAD, revascularization strategies, and long-term clinical outcomes in a large-scale all-comers TAVR-population. Nine hundred and forty-four consecutive patients underwent TAVR. Obstructive CAD was reported in 224 patients (23.7%)-of these, 150 (66.9%) presented with one-vessel disease (1-VD), 51 (22.8%) with 2-VD, and 23 (10.3%) with 3-VD. Two-thirds underwent coronary revascularization before TAVR; half of those patients with 1-VD and only one-third of those with multivessel disease were completely revascularized. In general, borderline stenoses (50%-70%) were more frequently revascularized in proximal coronary segments than in more distal segments. Long-term survival rates by Kaplan-Meier analysis of the total TAVR population at 5 and 9 years were 64.7% and 54.1%, respectively. A diagnostic coronary angiography was performed in 16.5% of patients within 5 years after TAVR; only 4.8% underwent consequent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There was no difference in survival and need for revascularization post-TAVR between those patients with or without obstructive CAD ± revascularization. Neither was there a survival difference between those with or without previous CABG and/or chronic total occlusion(s). In conclusion, CAD is prevalent in TAVR patients and pre-TAVR coronary revascularization is typically focused on treating proximal and high-grade stenosis. A selective pre-TAVR PCI strategy results in favorable clinical outcomes with very low rates of post-TAVR coronary revascularization.