Initial experience of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure using the LAmbre device for thromboembolic prevention

Abstract

The LAmbre occluder is a novel LAA-closure device with features that provide many options for LAA-closure to physicians, particularly in patients with challenging anatomies. From our initial experience, implantation is associated with a good success rate and clinical outcome.

Late clinical outcomes of lambre versus amplatzer occluders for left atrial appendage closure

“…Device success was high for both occluders and similar to other all‐comers studies for the LAmbre (99.3%, 12 100% 14–16 ) and Amplatzer devices (ACP: 97.3%, 6 Amulet: 99% 24 ). The rate of major periprocedural complications was numerically higher in the LAmbre group, although all LAmbre procedures were performed by a highly skilled operator and even though implantation of LAmbre devices started later in the recruitment phase of the center.…”

“…This observation is less a learning effect, it may be more a chance finding due to the low sample size of the LAmbre group. Other series with the LAmbre reported lower complication rates of 3.3%, 12 5.9% 16 and 0% 14,15 . Periprocedural adverse events in the LAmbre group comprised two pericardial tamponades and one access vessel complication with the need of surgery.…”

“…The rate for ischemic stroke only in the LAmbre group was respectively 2.7 events per 100 patient‐years, resulting in a 60% risk reduction for stroke, compared with the expected stroke rate with a mean CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score of 4.8 (expected rate of 6.7 events per 100 patient‐years 28 ). All other LAmbre registries with shorter follow‐up times from 6 to 12 months observed low rates of ischemic stroke (0%, 15–17 1.3% 12 ).…”

“…However, the rate of DRT was higher in the LAmbre than in the Amplatzer group, although statistical significance was not reached. Other LAmbre registries documented lower rates of DRT with 1.3% 12 and 0% 14–16 25–27 .…”

“…Small registry studies showed high implant success rates and acceptable periprocedural complication rates, as well as favorable short‐term clinical outcomes of the LAmbre device 12–16 . Another head‐to‐head comparison demonstrated comparable peri‐procedural and clinical outcomes for up to 6 months for LAmbre, Amulet, and Watchman 17 .…”