Preview

Комплексные проблемы сердечно-сосудистых заболеваний

Расширенный поиск

ACHIEVING LOW RADIATION EXPOSURE AND CONTRAST USAGE WITHOUT COMPROMISING SAFETY AND EFFICACY DURING WATCHMAN LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE OCCLUSION DEVICE IMPLANT

https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2018-7-3-6-11

Полный текст:

Аннотация

The study demonstrates the safety, feasibility and effectiveness of a comprehensive approach to minimize fluoroscopy and contrast use during Watchman left atrial closure device implantation.


Background. The introduction of Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion device (WM) has provided an effective alternative to anticoagulation for patients with a high risk of cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) and high risk of bleeding and who are unable to take long-term anticoagulation therapy. Since its introduction, WM has been implanted more than 50,000 times worldwide. While the implant procedure is relatively safe, it involves the use of fluoroscopy and contrast and, as such, poses some associated risk to patient safety. The adoption of procedural techniques which reduce fluoroscopy exposure and contrast use have the potential to provide clinical patient benefit without compromising safety or efficacy. Aim To demonstrate that WM implant can be performed with minimal exposure to both ionizing radiation and IV contrast without compromising safety or efficacy.


Methods. A retrospective chart review of all 75 consecutive Watchman implantations by a single operator at a single center between December 2015 and December 2017. Every effort to optimize the WM implant procedure and minimize radiation and contrast exposure was incorporated as implant techniques evolved. Contrast and radiation exposure data were collected and analyzed year-over-year.


Results. Charts from 75 consecutive cases were reviewed with all cases at index procedure (100%), and included the majority of patients presenting in paroxysmal AF (63%). Baseline patient characteristics were consistent across years. Procedural characteristics also were consistent over time. The median absorbed radiation dose was low (75 mGy in 2015) and did not change significantly over time. Similarly, the median fluoroscopy time used after the initial case was low (2.8 minutes) and did not vary. 73 of 75 (97%) of procedures resulted in successful implantation. There were no procedural complications; notably, no cases resulted in stroke, death, pericardial effusion, vascular accidents or device embolization.

Conclusion.The current generation of WM can be successfully implanted using low fluoroscopy and contrast without compromising safety or efficacy using the techniques described.

Об авторах

J. А. Reiss
Peace Health Southwest Medical Center.
Соединённые Штаты Америки

J.A. Reiss, medical doctor, master of public health, fellow of the American College of Cardiology, fellow of the Heart Rhythm Society, Heart & Vascular Department.

200 NE Mother Joseph Place, Suite 400, Vancouver, WA 98664, United States.



D. А. Evans
Peace Health Southwest Medical Center
Соединённые Штаты Америки

 D.A. Evans, Manager, Performance Improvement.

200 NE Mother Joseph Place, Suite 400, Vancouver, WA 98664, United States.



Список литературы

1. Reddy V.Y., Holmes D., Doshi S.K., Neuzil P., Kar S. Safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: results from the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients with AF (PROTECT AF) clinical trial and the Continued Access Registry. Circulation. 2011 Feb 1;123(4):417-24. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.976449.

2. Holmes D.R. Jr., Kar S., Price M.J., Whisenant B., Sievert H., Doshi S.K., Huber K., Reddy V.Y. Prospective randomized evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure device in patients with atrial fibrillation versus longterm warfarin therapy: the PREVAIL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Jul 8;64(1):1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.029.

3. Gianni C., Natale A. Reducing radiation exposure in the electrophysiology laboratory: A work in progress. Heart Rhythm. 2017 Jun;14(6):817-818. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.02.032.

4. Heidbuchel H., Wittkampf F.H., Vano E., Ernst S., Schilling R., Picano E., Mont L., Jais P., de Bono J., Piorkowski C., Saad E., Femenia F. Practical ways to reduce radiation dose for patients and staff during device implantations and electrophysiological procedures. Europace. 2014 Jul;16(7):94664. doi: 10.1093/europace/eut409

5. Fernández-Gómez J.M., Moriña-Vázquez P., Morales Edel R., Venegas-Gamero J., Barba-Pichardo R., Carranza M.H. Exclusion of fluoroscopy use in catheter ablation procedures: six years of experience at a single center. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014 Jun;25(6):638-44. doi: 10.1111/jce.12385

6. Casella M., Pelargonio G., Dello Russo A., Riva S., Bartoletti S., Santangeli P., Scarà A., Sanna T., Proietti R., Di Biase L., Gallinghouse G.J., Narducci M.L., Sisto L., Bellocci F., Natale A., Tondo C. "Near-zero" fluoroscopic exposure in supraventricular arrhythmia ablation using the EnSite NavX™ mapping system: personal experience and review of the literature. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2011 Aug;31(2):10918. doi: 10.1007/s10840-011-9553-5

7. Giaccardi M., Del Rosso A., Guarnaccia V., Ballo P., Mascia G., Chiodi L., Colella A. Near-zero x-ray in arrhythmia ablation using a 3-dimensional electroanatomic mapping system: A multicenter experience. Heart Rhythm. 2016 Jan;13(1):150-6. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.09.003

8. Yamagata K., Aldhoon B., Kautzner J.. Reduction of Fluoroscopy Time and Radiation Dosage During Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation. Arrhythmia & Electropysiology Review 2016;5(2): 144-149. doi: 10.15420/AER.2016.16.2

9. Matsuo Y., Neuzil P., Petru J., Chovanec M., Janotka M., Choudry S., Skoda J., Sediva L., Kurabayashi M., Reddy V.Y. Left Atrial Appendage Closure Under Intracardiac Echocardiographic Guidance: Feasibility and Comparison With Transesophageal Echocardiography. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Sep 28;5(10). pii: e003695. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003695.

10. Frangieh A.H., Alibegovic J., Templin C., Gaemperli O., Obeid S., Manka R., Holy E.W., Maier W., Lüscher T.F., Binder R.K. Intracardiac versus transesophageal echocardiography for left atrial appendage occlusion with watchman. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Aug 1;90(2):331-338. doi: 10.1002/ccd.26805.


Для цитирования:


Reiss J.А., Evans D.А. ACHIEVING LOW RADIATION EXPOSURE AND CONTRAST USAGE WITHOUT COMPROMISING SAFETY AND EFFICACY DURING WATCHMAN LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE OCCLUSION DEVICE IMPLANT. Комплексные проблемы сердечно-сосудистых заболеваний. 2018;7(3):6-11. https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2018-7-3-6-11

For citation:


Reiss J.А., Evans D.A. ACHIEVING LOW RADIATION EXPOSURE AND CONTRAST USAGE WITHOUT COMPROMISING SAFETY AND EFFICACY DURING WATCHMAN LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE OCCLUSION DEVICE IMPLANT. Complex Issues of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2018;7(3):6-11. https://doi.org/10.17802/2306-1278-2018-7-3-6-11

Просмотров: 117


Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2306-1278 (Print)
ISSN 2587-9537 (Online)