Three-Dimensional-Printed Models Reduce Adverse Events of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Jaeny Delos Santos, Francis Joshua Beloy, Ralf Martz Sulague, Henry Okudzeto, Jillian Reeze Medina, Thea Danielle Cartojano, Nikki Cruz, Edward Daniel Mortalla, Jacques Kpodonu
Author Information
Jaeny Delos Santos: Our Lady of Fatima University College of Medicine, Valenzuela City, Philippines. ORCID
Francis Joshua Beloy: Ateneo School of Medicine and Public Health, Pasig City, Philippines.
Ralf Martz Sulague: Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. ORCID
Henry Okudzeto: Dodowa Health Research Center, Dodowa, Greater Accra Region, Ghana. ORCID
Jillian Reeze Medina: Manila Central University College of Medicine, Caloocan City, Philippines.
Thea Danielle Cartojano: Cebu Institute of Medicine, Cebu City, Philippines.
Nikki Cruz: Our Lady of Fatima University College of Medicine, Valenzuela City, Philippines. ORCID
Edward Daniel Mortalla: Cebu Institute of Medicine, Cebu City, Philippines.
Jacques Kpodonu: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has an excellent safety profile but there is growing evidence of adverse long-term sequelae of peri-device leak and device-related thrombus. This study seeks to determine if guidance from 3D-printed models of left atrial appendages reduces the incidence of side effects. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in the following databases: Pubmed, Google Scholar, and Europe PMC. Cohort studies that directly compared outcomes using 3D-printed model simulations before undergoing LAAO versus using conventional imaging only among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, CHADS-VASc scores ≥ 1, and relative or absolute contraindications to long-term anticoagulation were included. Clinical outcomes included incidence of peri-device leak, mismatch, and device-related thrombus. Meta-analysis was done using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Only three cohort studies were eligible for meta-analysis with a mean follow-up period of 25 months. This included a total of 204 patients (mean age, 75 years). Using 3D printed models of left atrial appendage based on transesophageal echocardiogram and cardiac computed tomography had statistically significantly less incidence of peri-device leak (log OR -2.47; 95% CI: -3.70 to 1.24; p = 0.00), incidence of mismatch (log OR -1.61; 95% CI: -2.50 to 0.73; p = 0.00) and shorter procedural time (mean difference -24.86; 95% CI: -31.75 and -27.11; p = 0.00). Although the incidence of device-related thromboembolism was 49% less in the 3D printing-guided group, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Less incidence of peri-device leak and mismatch were observed with 3D printing-guided left atrial appendage occlusion. A highly powered randomized controlled trial may have to be done to confirm the findings.
J. Kornej, C. S. Börschel, E. J. Benjamin, and R. B. Schnabel, “Epidemiology of Atrial Fibrillation in the 21st Century,” Circulation Research 127, no. 1 (2020): 4–20, https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.120.316340.
Y. Miyasaka, M. E. Barnes, B. J. Gersh, et al., “Secular Trends in Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation in Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1980 to 2000, and Implications on the Projections for Future Prevalence,” Circulation 114, no. 2 (2006): 119–125, https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.595140.
A. S. Go, E. M. Hylek, K. A. Phillips, et al., “Prevalence of Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Adults: National Implications for Rhythm Management and Stroke Prevention: The AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors In Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study,” Journal of the American Medical Association 285, no. 18 (2001): 2370, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.18.2370.
R. M. Sulague, T. Whitham, L. M. L. Danganan, et al., “The Left Atrial Appendage and Atrial Fibrillation—A Contemporary Review,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 12, no. 21 (2023): 6909, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12216909.
V. Ciobotaru, N. Combes, C. A. Martin, et al., “Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Simulation Based on Three‐Dimensional Printing: New Insights Into Outcome and Technique,” EuroIntervention 14, no. 2 (2018): 176–184, https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00970.
Y. Fan, F. Yang, G. S. H. Cheung, et al., “Device Sizing Guided by Echocardiography‐Based Three‐Dimensional Printing Is Associated With Superior Outcome After Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion,” Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 32, no. 6 (2019): 708–719, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2019.02.003.
V. Y. Reddy, D. N. Gibson, S. Kar, et al., “Post‐Approval U.S. Experience With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology 69, no. 3 (2017): 253–261, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.10.010.
Y. Yu, H. Chu, B. Wang, B. He, and G. Fu, “Pericardial Effusion Following Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure Using the LAmbre Device,” Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 10 (2023): 1188322, https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1188322.
M. R. Afzal, J. K. Gabriels, G. G. Jackson, et al., “Temporal Changes and Clinical Implications of Delayed Peridevice Leak Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure,” JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology 8, no. 1 (2022): 15–25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2021.06.018.
E. Obasare, S. K. Mainigi, D. L. Morris, et al., “CT Based 3D Printing Is Superior to Transesophageal Echocardiography for Pre‐Procedure Planning in Left Atrial Appendage Device Closure,” International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 34, no. 5 (2017): 821–831, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-017-1289-6.
L. Friberg, M. Rosenqvist, and G. Y. H. Lip, “Evaluation of Risk Stratification Schemes for Ischaemic Stroke and Bleeding In 182 678 Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The Swedish Atrial Fibrillation Cohort Study,” European Heart Journal 33, no. 12 (2012): 1500–1510, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr488.
Y. Fan, F. Yang, G. S. H. Cheung, et al., “Device Sizing Guided by Echocardiography‐Based Three‐Dimensional Printing Is Associated With Superior Outcome After Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion,” Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 32, no. 6 (2019): 708–719, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2019.02.003.
S. R. Dukkipati, S. Kar, D. R. Holmes, et al., “Device‐Related Thrombus After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes,” Circulation 138, no. 9 (2018): 874–885, https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035090.
M. Alkhouli, C. Du, A. Killu, et al., “Clinical Impact of Residual Leaks Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion,” JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology 8, no. 6 (2022): 766–778, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2022.03.001.
K. Mendez, D. G. Kennedy, D. D. Wang, B. O'Neill, and E. T. Roche, “Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Current Stroke Prevention Strategies and a Shift Toward Data‐Driven, Patient‐Specific Approaches,” Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions 1, no. 5 (2022): 100405, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100405.
Z. Sun and C. Wee, “3D Printed Models in Cardiovascular Disease: An Exciting Future to Deliver Personalized Medicine,” Micromachines 13, no. 10 (2022): 1575, https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13101575.
Z. Sun, Y. H. Wong, and C. H. Yeong, “Patient‐Specific 3D‐Printed Low‐Cost Models in Medical Education and Clinical Practice,” Micromachines 14, no. 2 (2023): 464, https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14020464.
