Abstract:Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has been demonstrated to be an alternative to oral anticoagulation for the prevention of ischemic stroke in nonvalvar atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients. However, there were some designed limitations of current widely-used devices. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel double-disc LAA closure (LAAC) device, the LEFTEAR, in patients with NVAF who had contraindications of long-term oral anticoagulation or still high risks of stroke with anticoagulation treatment. Subjects and Methods: A total of 200 NVAF patients who underwent LAAC were prospectively recruited in nine participating centers in China between April 2014 and March 2019 in this prospective, multi-center, single-arm study. The study was approved by the institutional review board of each clinical center. The enrolled cases had ages ranged from 38 to 89 years (mean 68.3 ± 8.7) years. There were 112 males (56%). CHA2DS2-VASc scores were 3.5 ± 1.44, and HAS-BLED scores 2.5 ± 1.18. LAAC was conducted with the LEFTEAR occluder. Successful closure of LAA was defined as there was no or a small amount of peri-device leak (PDL ≤3 mm) of residual shunt, evaluated by transesophageal echocardiography. The composite end-point events (hemorrhagic/ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiogenic/unexplained death) within 12 months after the procedure were the main efficacy indicators. Severe adverse events (SAEs) within 12 months were safety indicators. Results: Totally 196 were implanted with an occluder, and the remaining 4 were not (1 case found with an large LAA which the ostium was great than 35 mm, the upper limit of the clinical program, 1 case gave up after failed attempt of LAAC procedure, 2 cases showed “pericardial tamponade” after AF ablation and no attempts were made to continue LAAC). Among them, the “Hybrid procedures” (LAAC combined with AF ablation) reached up to 133 cases (66.5%). Up to December 31, 2019, the mean follow-up was 6 months. There were none major composite endpoint events occurred during the perioperative and follow-up periods (0%). SAEs were recorded in 10 cases, of which 7 were “pericardial tamponades” and 3 of “occluder detachment or displacements.” All SAEs occurred in “Hybrid procedures” cases, of which 9 occurred in the perioperative period (90%). Six cases of “pericardial tamponade” were recorded in the perioperative period, but only two required emergency surgeries. The successful rate of immediate LAAC was 100%, among which 178 cases (90.8%, 178/196) had no residual shunt (PDL = 0 mm). A total of 153 cases (79.7%, 153/192) had completed at least one follow-up transoesophageal echocardiography examination, and the success of mid-term LAAC was 98.7% (151/153), with no events of device-related thrombosis. Conclusions: LAAC with a novel disc-like occlude, named LEFTEAR was generally effective and safe. The “Hybrid procedures” increased the incidence of adverse events to some extent. This study was the first-in-human trial of LEFTEAR, thus further larger sample studies are still needed to verify.

Lower Rate of Major Bleeding in Very High-Risk Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Propensity-Matched Comparison with Direct Oral Anticoagulation.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Anticoagulation Failure vs Anticoagulation Contraindication

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion vs Standard of Care After Ischemic Stroke Despite Anticoagulation

Left atrial appendage occlusion devices vs direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Low-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulation vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: The ADALA Randomized Clinical Trial

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and risk of stroke, hospitalized bleeding and death in Medicare beneficiaries

A real-world multicenter study on left atrial appendage occlusion: The Italian multi-device experience

An Updated Meta-Analysis on the Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the Prevention of Ischaemic Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Clinical follow-up of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation ineligible of oral anticoagulation treatment—a systematic review and meta-analysis

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Compared With Oral Anticoagulants for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Anticoagulation Alone vs Anticoagulation Plus Aspirin or DAPT Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Outcomes Associated With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Via Implanted Device in Atrial Fibrillation

Efficacy and Safety of Low or Reduced Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Short-term antithrombotic strategies after left atrial appendage occlusion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Minimally invasive left atrial appendage occlusion plus reduced dose direct oral anticoagulant to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation—the LAAO-PlusRE

Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients suffering from advanced chronic kidney disease (stage 4 and 5). Long‐term follow‐up

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion versus Novel Oral Anticoagulation for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation—One-Year Survival

A Prospective, Multi-Center, Single-Arm Study of a Novel Double-Disc Left Atrial Appendage Closure System: the Periprocedural and Mid-Term Outcomes (english Version)

The Association of Hematological Markers with Occurrence of Thrombotic and Bleeding Events following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

A comparison of simplified or conventional antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure in patients at high bleeding risk: the PLATEBRISK study