Short-Term Antiplatelet Versus Anticoagulant Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Single versus dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous left atrial appendage closure-A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the last few years, percutaneous LAA occlusion (LAAO) has become a plausible alternative in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with contraindications to anticoagulation therapy. Nevertheless, the optimal antiplatelet strategy following percutaneous LAAO remains to be defined.

METHODS

Studies comparing single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) versus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following LAAO were systematically searched and screened. The outcomes of interest were ischemic stroke, device-related thrombus (DRT) and major bleeding. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed comparing outcomes in both groups. The moderator effect of baseline characteristics on outcomes was evaluated by univariate meta-regression analyses.

RESULTS

Sixteen observational studies with 3255 patients treated with antiplatelet therapy (SAPT, n = 1033; DAPT, n = 2222) after LAAO were included. Mean age was 74.5 ± 8.3 years, mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.3 ± 1.5 and 3.2 ± 1.0, respectively. At a weighted mean follow-up of 12.7 months, the occurrence of stroke (RR 1.33; 95% CI 0.64-2.77; p =.44), DRT (RR 1.52; 95% CI 0.90-2.58; p =.12), and the composite of stroke and DRT (RR 1.26; 95% CI 0.67-2.37; p =.47) did not differ significantly between SAPT and DAPT groups. The rate of major bleedings was also not different between groups (RR 1.41; 95% CI 0.64-3.12; p =.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Among AF patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous LAAO, a post-procedural minimalistic antiplatelet strategy with SAPT did not significantly differ from DAPT regimens regarding the rate of stroke, DRT and major bleeding.

Short-term antiplatelet versus anticoagulant therapy after left atrial appendage closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of different antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from their inception to March 2023. Patients were divided into short-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) group and antiplatelet therapy (APT) group. The incidence of events were performed using RevMan 5.4. The events including device-related thrombus (DRT), ischemic stroke/systemic embolization (SE), major bleeding, any bleeding, any major adverse event and all-cause mortality. Subgroup analysis were based on OAC alone or OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) in OAC group. Oral anticoagulants include warfarin and direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). Fourteen studies with 35,166 patients were included. We found that the incidence of DRT (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.66, P＜0.0001) and all-cause mortality (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.89, P = 0.002) were significantly lower in OAC group than APT group. However, there was no statistical differences in the incidence rates of ischemic stroke/SE (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.20, P = 0.25), major bleeding (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.27, P = 0.84), any bleeding (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.56-1.22, P = 0.34) and any major adverse event (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.30-1.03, P = 0.06) in the two groups. Subgroup analysis found that the incidence of DRT, all-cause mortality and any major adverse event in OAC monotherapy were lower than that in APT group (P＜0.05), but not statistically different from other outcome. The incidence of DRT, all-cause mortality, any major adverse event and any bleeding in DOAC were significantly better than APT group (P＜0.05). While warfarin only has better incidence of DRT than APT (P＜0.05), there was no statistical difference between the two groups in other outcome (P＞0.05). The incidence of DRT was significantly lower than APT group (P＜0.05), major bleeding were higher, and the rest of the outcome did not show any statistically significant differences(P＞0.05) when OAC plus SAPT. Based on the existing data, short-term OAC may be favored over APT for patients who undergo LAAC. DOAC monotherapy may be favored over warfarin monotherapy or OAC plus APT, when selecting anticoagulant therapies.

Left atrial appendage occlusion for atrial fibrillation and bleeding diathesis

BACKGROUND

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and likelihood of bleeding can undergo left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as an alternative method of stroke prophylaxis. Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs are used postprocedure to offset the risk of device-related thrombus, evidence for this practice is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate optimal postimplant antithrombotic strategy in high bleeding-risk patients.

METHODS

Patients with AF and high-risk for both stroke and bleeding undergoing LAAO were advised their perioperative drug therapy by a multidisciplinary physician panel. Those deemed to be at higher risk of bleeding from anti-thrombotic drugs were assigned to minimal treatment with no antithrombotics or Aspirin-alone. The remaining patients received standard care (STG) with a 12 week course of dual-antiplatelets or anticoagulation postimplant. We compared mortality, device-related thrombus, ischemic stroke, and bleeding events during the 90 days postimplant and long-term. Event-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with logrank testing for statistical significance.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients underwent LAAO of whom 63 patients (84%) had a prior serious bleeding event. The 42 patients on minimal treatment were older (74.3 ± 7.7 vs. 71.2 ± 7.2) with higher HASBLED score (3.6 ± 0.9 vs. 3.3 ± 1.2) than the 33 patients having standard care. There were no device-related thrombi or strokes in either group at 90 days postprocedure; STG had more bleeding events (5/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.01) with associated deaths (3/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.05). During long-term follow-up (median 2.2 years), all patients transitioned onto no antithrombotic drugs (43 patients [61%]) or a single-antiplatelet (29 patients [39%]). There was no evidence of early minimal treatment adversely affecting long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs may not be needed after LAAO implant in patients with high bleeding risk and could be harmful. Larger, prospective studies would be warranted to test these findings.

Clinical Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Switch of Direct Oral Antcoagulant in Atrial Fibrillation: A Territory-Wide Retrospective Analysis

Background Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative to oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, but data comparing LAAO with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) are sparse. Methods and Results This cohort study compared LAAO (with or without prior anticoagulation) with a switch of one DOAC to another DOAC by 1:2 propensity score matching. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding. A total of 2350 patients (874 in the LAAO group and 1476 in the DOAC switch group) were included. After a mean follow-up of 1052±694 days, the primary outcome developed in 215 (24.6%) patients in the LAAO group and in 335 (22.7%) patients in the DOAC switch group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.80-1.12]; P=0.516). The LAAO group had a lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.39-0.60]; P<0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32-0.73]; P<0.001) but similar risk of ischemic stroke (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.10]; P=0.194). The major bleeding risk was similar overall (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.94-1.48], P=0.150) but was lower in the LAAO group after 6 months (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.51-0.97]; P=0.032). Conclusions LAAO conferred a similar risk of composite outcome of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding, as compared with DOAC switch. The risks of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality were lower with LAAO.

Short-term antithrombotic strategies after left atrial appendage occlusion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as a stroke prevention strategy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), and these patients were required to receive antithrombotic therapy post-procedure. However, the optimal antithrombotic strategy after LAAO remains controversial. This study explored the safety and efficacy of different antithrombotic strategies after LAAO through a network comparison method. Methods: We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that reported the interested efficacy and safety outcomes (stroke, device-related thrombus (DRT), and major bleeding) of different antithrombotic strategies [DAPT (dual antiplatelet therapy), DOACs (direct oral anticoagulants), and VKA (vitamin k antagonist)] in patients who had experienced LAAO. Pairwise comparisons and network meta-analysis were performed for the interested outcomes. Risk ratios (RRs) with their confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. The rank of the different strategies was calculated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: Finally, 10 observational studies involving 1,674 patients were included. There was no significant difference in stroke, DRT, and major bleeding among the different antithrombotic strategies (DAPT, DOACs, and VKA). Furthermore, DAPT ranked the worst in terms of stroke (SUCRA: 19.8%), DRT (SUCRA: 3.6%), and major bleeding (SUCRA: 6.6%). VKA appeared to be superior to DOACs in terms of stroke (SUCRA: 74.9% vs. 55.3%) and DRT (SUCRA: 82.3% vs. 64.1%) while being slightly inferior to DOACs in terms of major bleeding (SUCRA: 71.0% vs. 72.4%). Conclusion: No significant difference was found among patients receiving DAPT, DOACs, and VKA in terms of stroke, DRT, and major bleeding events after LAAO. The SUCRA indicated that DAPT was ranked the worst among all antithrombotic strategies due to the higher risk of stroke, DRT, and major bleeding events, while VKAs were ranked the preferred antithrombotic strategy. However, DOACs are worthy of consideration due to their advantage of convenience.

SCAI/HRS expert consensus statement on transcatheter left atrial appendage closure

Exclusion of the left atrial appendage to reduce thromboembolic risk related to atrial fibrillation was first performed surgically in 1949. Over the past 2 decades, the field of transcatheter endovascular left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has rapidly expanded, with a myriad of devices approved or in clinical development. The number of LAAC procedures performed in the United States and worldwide has increased exponentially since the Food and Drug Administration approval of the WATCHMAN (Boston Scientific) device in 2015. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) has previously published statements in 2015 and 2016 providing societal overview of the technology and institutional and operator requirements for LAAC. Since then, results from several important clinical trials and registries have been published, technical expertise and clinical practice have matured over time, and the device and imaging technologies have evolved. Therefore, SCAI prioritized the development of an updated consensus statement to provide recommendations on contemporary, evidence-based best practices for transcatheter LAAC focusing on endovascular devices.

Treatment of Persistent Left Atrial Appendage Thrombus in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation on Adequate Oral Anticoagulation: Pathways of Care for All-comers and Heart Failure Patients

In patients with AF, the presence of left atrial/left atrial appendage (LA/LAA) thrombus is related to an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Anticoagulation therapy, either with vitamin K antagonists or novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is therefore mandatory in AF with LA/LAA thrombus in order to lower the risk of stroke or other systemic embolic events. Despite the efficacy of these treatments, some patients will have persistent LAA thrombus remaining or may have contraindications to oral anticoagulation. Currently, little is known about the occurrence, risk factors and resolution rate of LA/LAA thrombus in patients who are already under optimal chronic oral anticoagulation, including vitamin K antagonists or NOACs. The common action in clinical practice in this scenario is switching from one to another anticoagulant drug exhibiting a different mechanism of action. Repeated cardiac imaging is then advised within several weeks to visually verify thrombus dissolution. Finally, there is a substantial scarcity of data on the role and optimal use of NOACs after LAA occlusion. The aim of this review is to critically evaluate data and provide up-to-date information on the best antithrombotic strategies in this challenging clinical scenario.

Atrial fibrillation: Primary prevention, secondary prevention, and prevention of thromboembolic complications: Part 2

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, once thought to be benign as long as the ventricular rate was controlled, is associated with significant cardiac morbidity and mortality. Increasing life expectancy driven by improved health care and decreased fertility rates has, in most of the world, resulted in the population aged ≥65 years growing more rapidly than the overall population. As the population ages, projections suggest that the burden of AF may increase more than 60% by 2050. Although considerable progress has been made in the treatment and management of AF, primary prevention, secondary prevention, and prevention of thromboembolic complications remain a work in progress. This narrative review was facilitated by a search of MEDLINE to identify peer-reviewed clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and other clinically relevant studies. The search was limited to English-language reports published between 1950 and 2021. Atrial fibrillation was searched using the terms primary prevention, hyperthyroidism, Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, catheter ablation, surgical ablation, hybrid ablation, stroke prevention, anticoagulation, left atrial occlusion and atrial excision. Google and Google scholar as well as bibliographies of identified articles were reviewed for additional references. In these two manuscripts, we discuss the current strategies available to prevent AF, then compare non-invasive and invasive treatment strategies to diminish AF recurrence. In addition, we examine the pharmacological, percutaneous device and surgical approaches to prevent stroke as well as other types of thromboembolic events.

An updated meta-analysis of device related thrombus following left atrial appendage closure in patients with atrial fibrillation

Aims

Device related thrombus (DRT) is a known complication of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). However, the relation between DRT and elevated risk of ischemic events remains controversial. This study is sought to reassessed the incidence of DRT following LAAC and the relation between DRT and elevated risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (SE) with latest clinical trials included.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from their inception until April 2022 for studies that reported the incidence of DRT and compared the incidence of both stroke and SE between DRT patients and non-DRT patients.

Results

In 59 eligible studies, the incidence of DRT was 366/12,845 (2.8%, ranging from 0 to 11%, I ² = 64%). The incidence of DRT was not statistically different between single-seal device (SS) and dual-seal device (DS) in subgroup analysis [171/6,190 (2.8%) vs. 78/3,023 (3.6%); p = 0.93]. The pooled incidence of stroke (26 studies, 7,827 patients) in patients with and without DRT was 11.5% in DRT patients and 2.9% among non-DRT patients (OR: 5.08; 95% CI = 3.47-7.44). In the sensitivity analysis, DRT was associated with higher rate of stroke (12.1 vs. 3.2%; OR: 4.14; 95% CI = 2.69-6.38) and SE (16.0 vs. 3.8%; OR: 4.48; 95% CI = 3.04-6.62).

Conclusion

The incidence of DRT was low and similar between SS and DS devices. DRT was associated with increased rates of ischemic events. The occurrence rate of ischemic events associated DRT was comparable between two occlusion mechanism devices.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/], identifier [CRD42022326179].

Low Dose of Direct Oral Anticoagulants after Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

The optimal antithrombotic strategy following left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is not yet clearly established. Low-dose non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) might represent a valid alternative, but data regarding their usage is scarce. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of low-dose NOAC compared to single (SAPT) or dual antiplatelet therapies (DAPT) after LAAO. We included consecutive patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who underwent LAAO and received low-dose apixaban, SAPT, or DAPT at discharge. The primary objective of this study included an efficacy endpoint (thromboembolic events and device related thrombosis (DRT)) and a safety endpoint (incidence of major bleeding) within the first three months after LAAO. A total of 139 patients were included. This group involved SAPT in 26 (18%), DAPT in 73 (53%), and apixaban in 40 (29%) patients. Follow-up at three-months showed no significant differences in the primary efficacy endpoint (2 (8%) SAPT, 3 (4%) DAPT and 0 (0%) apixaban; p value = 0.25). In contrast, the primary safety endpoint occurred more frequently in DAPT patients (7 (10%) DAPT, 0 (0%), SAPT and 0 with apixaban; p value = 0.03). Combining both efficacy and safety outcomes, low dose apixaban had a lower rate of events (2 (8%) with SAPT, 9 (12%) with DAPT and 0 (0%) with apixaban; p = 0.046). Low-dose apixaban after LAAO may be a valid alternative to DAPT and SAPT as depicted by the reduction in the occurrence of major bleedings and combined DRT/major bleedings respectively. Randomized data will be necessary to validate this strategy.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Interventions for Structural Heart Disease

Contemporary evidence supports device-based transcatheter interventions for the management of patients with structural heart disease. These procedures, which include aortic valve implantation, mitral or tricuspid valve repair/implantation, left atrial appendage occlusion, and patent foramen ovale closure, profoundly differ with respect to clinical indications and procedural aspects. Yet, patients undergoing transcatheter cardiac interventions require antithrombotic therapy before, during, or after the procedure to prevent thromboembolic events. However, these therapies are associated with an increased risk of bleeding complications. To date, challenges and controversies exist regarding balancing the risk of thrombotic and bleeding complications in these patients such that the optimal antithrombotic regimens to adopt in each specific procedure is still unclear. In this review, we summarize current evidence on antithrombotic therapies for device-based transcatheter interventions targeting structural heart disease and emphasize the importance of a tailored approach in these patients.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent evidence evaluating the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO), current guideline recommendations for LAAO use, performance of LAAO in comparison with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and recently approved LAAO device.

RECENT FINDINGS

The last 18 months have been marked with increasing evidence of the utility of LAAO in patients who are not candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). Long-term data from two continued access registries to PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL support LAAO as a safe and effective long-term anticoagulation therapy. This new evidence led to class IIb recommendation for LAAO in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients not eligible for long-term OAC. PRAGUE-17 randomized controlled trial showed LAAO is noninferior to DOAC lending support to use of this modality in current era. PINNACLE FLX trial showed improved implant success and adequate closure rate which led to the device's Food and Drug Administration approval.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, percutaneous LAAO appears to be a promising option for NVAF patients who are not candidates for long-term OAC in the current era. Further evidence guiding optimal patient selection and periprocedural antithrombotic regimen will help identify the patients who would benefit the most from this procedure.