CT sizing for left atrial appendage closure is associated with favourable outcomes for procedural safety

Aims We evaluated the utility of computerized tomography (CT) with respect to sizing work-up for percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure, and implications for procedural safety and outcomes. Methods and results Contrast-enhanced multi-detector CT was routinely conducted to guide sizing for LAA closure in addition to transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE). Procedural safety and efficacy were prospectively assessed. Across 73 consecutive cases there were no device-related procedural complications, and no severe leaks. Systematic bias in orifice sizing by TOE vs. CT was significant on retrospective analysis (bias '3.0 mm vs. maximum diameter on CT; bias '1.1 mm vs. mean diameter on CT). Importantly, this translated to an altered device size selection in more than half of all cases, and median size predicted by CT was one interval greater than that predicted by TOE (27 mm vs. 24 mm). Of particular note, gross sizing error by TOE vs. CT was observed in at least 3.4% of cases. Degree of discrepancy between TOE and CT was correlated with LAA orifice eccentricity, orifice size, and left atrial volume. Mean orifice size by CT had the greatest utility for final Watchman device-size selection. Conclusions In this single-centre registry of LAA closure, routine incorporation of CT was associated with excellent outcomes for procedural safety and absence of major residual leak. Mean orifice size may be preferable to maximum orifice size. A particular value of CT may be the detection and subsequent avoidance of gross sizing error by 2D TOE that occurs in a small but important proportion of cases.