There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Imaging guidance for left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC), conventionally consists
of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and fluoroscopy under general anesthesia
(GA). Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) can eliminate the need for GA, and expedite
procedural logistics, and reduce the patient experience to a simple venous puncture.
To define optimal ICE views and compare procedural parameters and cost of ICE vs TEE
during LAAC with the Watchman device. Optimal ICE views of the LAA for Watchman implant
were delineated using Carto-Sound and 3D rendition of the LAA in 6 patients. Procedural
and financial parameters of 104 consecutive patients with standard indications for
LAAC undergoing Watchman implant using ICE guidance through a single trans-septal
puncture (n=53, 51%) were compared with those of TEE-guided implants (n=51, 49%) in
3 centers. Clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. Total in-room,
turnaround and fluoroscopy times were all shorter using ICE (p<0.05) under local anesthesia
compared to the TEE group. Implant success was 100% in both groups without peri-device
leaks or procedural complications. Follow-up TEE showed no significant peri-device
leak in both groups. Total hospital charges for ICE with local anesthesia vs TEE were
similar as were total hospital direct and indirect costs. Professional fees were significantly
lower with ICE and local anesthesia than with TEE as the charge of anesthesia staff
was avoided. ICE-guided Watchman implant is safe, feasible, and comparable in cost
to TEE during LAAC with a Watchman device while avoiding GA and expediting the procedure
turnaround.