Peridevice Leak Following Amplatzer Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Cardiac Computed Tomography Classification and Clinical Outcomes.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES\nThis study aimed to investigate cardiac computed tomography (CT) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) peridevice leak (PDL) assessments, and the clinical relevance of PDL.\n\n\nBACKGROUND\nPDL assessment is integral during follow-up after left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion. Comparative studies of TEE and cardiac CT are sparse, and the clinical relevance of PDL is uncertain.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThis was a single-center observational study of consecutive patients undergoing LAA occlusion with Amplatzer devices (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet) between 2010 and 2018 (N\xa0=\xa0415). Patients with both 8-week CT and TEE were included for analysis (n\xa0=\xa0346). Images were analyzed by blinded investigators (K.K. and A.S.). PDL on cardiac CT was classified from grade 1 to 3, based on PDL at the device disc, device lobe, and LAA contrast patency. Primary clinical outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, or all-cause death.\n\n\nRESULTS\nPDL was present in 110 patients (32%) by TEE, with 29 (8%) >3\xa0mm. By cardiac CT, 210 patients (61%) had PDL at the disc, with contrast patency in 204 patients (59%). A grade 3 PDL (gap at disc, lobe, and LAA contrast patency) was present in 63 patients (18%). Bland-Altman analysis showed poor agreement between CT and TEE for leak sizing. CT and TEE detected PDL was not significantly associated with worse outcome, hazard ratio: 1.82 (95 % confidence interval: 0.95 to 3.50); p\xa0=\xa00.07 and hazard ratio: 1.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 2.76); p\xa0=\xa00.28, respectively.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nPDL occurrence is substantially higher with CT compared with TEE, with a large discrepancy between modalities in leak quantification. A novel CT-based classification is proposed, yet PDL was not associated with worse clinical outcome.