Suture or Device? A Real-World Analysis of the Closure Strategies in Patients Undergoing LAA Occlusion

TL;DR

This study compares two methods for closing blood vessels after a heart procedure and finds both are equally safe and effective.

Contribution

The study provides real-world evidence comparing Z-sutures and ProGlide™ for vascular closure after LAA occlusion in high-risk patients.

Findings

Bleeding rates were comparable between Z-sutures (12.6%) and ProGlide™ (13.5%).

No 30-day deaths occurred in either group, and hospital stay durations were similar.

Abstract

Background: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a valuable alternative to long-term anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and a high bleeding risk. However, effective vascular closure following large-bore venous access remains a clinical challenge, particularly in patients with multiple comorbidities. This study compares two venous closure techniques—Z-sutures and the suture-mediated ProGlide™ device—regarding their safety and efficacy in patients undergoing LAAO. Methods: We conducted a single-center observational study including 163 patients treated with LAAO between 2021 and 2024. Closure was achieved via a Z-suture (n = 126) or the ProGlide™ (n = 37) based on operator preference. The primary endpoint was clinically relevant bleeding (BARC ≥ 2). The secondary endpoints included 30-day mortality and hospital stay duration. Results: The Z-suture group included older and more comorbid patients. Despite these differences, the bleeding rates were comparable between groups. Clinically relevant bleeding was infrequent (Z-suture: 12.6%; ProGlide™: 13.5%). No 30-day deaths occurred in either group, and their hospital stay durations were similar. Conclusions: Both the Z-suture and ProGlide™ techniques demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy. Due to their simplicity and potential cost advantage, Z-sutures may be a practical alternative in routine care for high-risk patients.

Figures