TRAPEUR Registry: Thrombus Trapping with Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices are a good alternative for the prevention of systemic thromboembolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and high risk of bleeding or those with anticoagulation contraindication

Registro TRAPEUR: Atrapamiento del trombo con dispositivo para cierre de orejuela

According to PRAGUE-17 outcomes, at 4 years, LAAC resulted non-inferior to direct anticoagulation in the prevention of cardiovascular, neurological, and bleeding events. 

LAAC presents a few contraindications, such as the presence of left atrial appendage thrombi prior procedure. In these cases, the most frequent strategy is short parenteral anticoagulation for thrombus resolution and following device implantation.  

However, in some circumstances, anticoagulants might cause bleeding events. In this regard, some studies have reported the feasibility of LAAC device implantation, despite the presence of thrombi. This have been dubbed “LAAC trapping devices” (TTP-LAAC). 

To assess their safety, the TRAPEUR registry was carried out (Thrombus Traping Eureopean Registry). This retrospective multicenter registry including 13 European centers with high LAAC implantation volume, included patients with LACC indication (Amulet or Watchman FLX) with prior or concurrent thrombus presence (TTP-LAAC ad-hoc). Thrombi were stratified according to location (proximal or distal) and size (> or < 50% of atrial appendage surface). To minimize risk of embolism, the “no touch technique” by Jalal Z et al was used. 

Read also: Safety of Acetylcholine in the Cath Lab.

Primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, stroke or transient ischemic attack, or peripheral embolization at 30 days. Secondary end points were device thromboembolism, cardiac tamponade, and major or minor bleeding. 

Of 1918 patients receiving LAAC, 4% presented prior thrombi (77 patients). In 24 patients there was thrombus resolution with anticoagulation optimization, and outcomes of 53 TTP-LAAC patients were finally analyzed. A few patients presented proximal thromboembolism (n=3), thrombi measuring >50% (n=9).

AT 30 days, there was 2% incidence of primary end point (CI 95% 0-5.8%), 10% minor bleeding and 4% major bleeding. 

Conclusions

TTP-LAAC was feasible, with few adverse events (2% cardiovascular and 4% bleeding). The study also showed a short anticoagulation strategy is also safe when it comes to reducing thrombus burden prior procedure. The study has the limitations of a registry, and few patients with thromboembolism at implantation. However, the safety of this procedure is promising and provides more opportunities to use LAAC devices. 

Dr. Omar Tupayachi

Dr. Omar Tupayachi.
Member of the Editorial Board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Left atrial appendage closure for thrombus trapping: the international, multicentre TRAPEUR registry.

Reference: Sebag, Frederic A et al. “Left atrial appendage closure for thrombus trapping: the international, multicentre TRAPEUR registry.” EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology vol. 18,1 (2022): 50-57. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00713.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...

Cardiac Remodeling After Percutaneous ASD Closure: Should It Be Immediate or Progressive?

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is a common congenital heart disease that generates a left-to-right shunt, leading to right-side chamber overload and a risk of...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...