Background: Accumulated clinical studies utilize intracardiac
echocardiography (ICE) to guide percutaneous left atrial appendage
closure (LAAO), but its procedural success and safety compared to
traditional transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) remain elusive. We
performed a meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety between ICE and
TEE for LAAO. Methods: Studies were screened with four online
databases (including the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of
Science) from their inception to 1 December 2022. We utilized random or
fixed-effect model to synthesize the clinical outcomes. Subgroup
analysis was performed to screen the potential confounding factors.
Results: A total of twenty eligible studies with 3,610 atrial
fibrillation patients (1,564 patients for ICE and 2,046 patients for
TEE) were enrolled. Compared with TEE group, there was no significant
difference in procedural success rate (RR=1.01; 95% CI: 1.00,1.02;
P=0.171; I²=0.00%), total procedural time [weighted mean
difference (WMD) = -5.58; 95%CI: -15.97, 4.81; P=0.292;
I²=96.40%], contrast volume (WMD=-2.61; 95%CI: -12.25, 7.02;
P=0.595; I²=84.80%), and fluoroscopic time (WMD=-0.34; 95%CI:
−2.09, 1.41; P=0.705; I²=82.80%) in the ICE group. Subgroup
analysis revealed ICE showed less contrast use than TEE in the lower
proportion paroxysmal atrial fibrillation group and lower proportion
hypertension. Conclusion: Our study suggests that ICE may have
comparable efficacy and safety compared to TEE for LAAO.