Clinical Outcomes Associated With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation

Left atrial appendage occlusion devices vs direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) are the first line anticoagulation for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as a new therapy and its safety and effectiveness compared with DOACs are still controversial.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies was conducted, focusing on patients with NVAF. Outcomes analyzed included: (1) all-cause mortality; (2) cardiovascular (CV) mortality; (3) thromboembolic events; (4) stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA); (5) bleeding events; and a (6) composite of death, hemorrhagic, and thromboembolic events. We performed a subgroup analysis of major bleeding according to different definitions: (1) Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC); (2) International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH); and (3) other definitions.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 18,507 patients were included, with 42.35 % undergoing LAAO. In pooled analysis, LAAO was associated with lower rates of all-cause mortality (HR 0.63; 95 % CI 0.50-0.80), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.56; 95 % CI 0.45-0.70), and of the composite outcome (HR 0.73; 95 % CI 0.58-0.92). A trend towards lower stroke/TIA events was observed but not statistically significant. Overall bleeding events did not significantly differ between groups; using the ISTH definition, LAAO showed significantly lower incidence of bleeding events (HR 0.63; 95 % CI 0.43-0.91). No difference was found in thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSION

LAAO was associated with a significantly lower all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, as well as the composite of death, hemorrhagic or thromboembolic events, as compared with DOACs.

Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation and intracerebral haemorrhage associated with cerebral amyloid angiopathy: a multicentre observational study and pooled analysis of published studies

BACKGROUND

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is a common cause of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) with a high recurrence risk. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a method for ischaemic stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), potentially reducing the risk of intracranial bleeding in CAA-associated ICH. We aimed to determine the outcomes of patients with AF with CAA-associated ICH undergoing LAAO.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre study of patients with CAA-associated ICH who underwent LAAO for stroke prevention. We pooled our findings with data from a systematic review of relevant published studies of LAAO for AF in ICH survivors reporting CAA diagnosis.

RESULTS

We included data from two published studies (n=65) with CAA-specific data and our cohort study (n=37), providing a total of 102 participants (mean age 76.2±8.0 years, 74.6% male) with CAA-related symptomatic ICH and AF treated with LAAO. The median follow-up period was 9.4 months (IQR 4.2-20.6). Postprocedural antithrombotic regimens varied between single (73.0%) or dual antiplatelet therapy (16.2%), or direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) (10.8%), with a median duration of 42 days (IQR 35-74). Postprocedural complications were uncommon, but included transient arrhythmias (2.1%) and non-life-threatening tamponade (2.1%). Pooled incidence rates of ischaemic stroke and ICH during follow-up were 5.16 (95% CI 1.36 to 17.48) and 2.73 (95% CI 0.41 to 13.94) per 100 patient years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

LAAO followed by short-term antithrombotic therapy might be a safe and effective ischaemic stroke preventive strategy in people with CAA-associated ICH and AF. However, randomised controlled trials are needed to determine how LAAO compares with long-term DOAC in this population.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023415354.

An International Consensus Practical Guide on Left Atrial Appendage Closure for the Non-implanting Physician: Executive Summary

Many patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are in need of stroke prevention are not treated with oral anticoagulation or discontinue treatment shortly after its initiation. Despite the availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such undertreatment has improved somewhat but is still evident. This is due to continued risks of bleeding events or ischemic strokes while on DOAC, poor treatment compliance, or aversion to anticoagulant therapy. Because of significant improvements in procedural safety over the years left atrial appendage closure (LAAC), using a catheter-based, device implantation approach, is increasingly favored for the prevention of thromboembolic events in AF patients who cannot have long-term oral anticoagulation. This article is an executive summary of a practical guide recently published by an international expert consensus group, which introduces the LAAC devices and briefly explains the implantation technique. The indications and device follow-up are more comprehensively described. This practical guide, aligned with published guideline/guidance, is aimed at those non-implanting physicians who may need to refer patients for consideration of LAAC.

Outcomes of left atrial appendage closure versus oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results of Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulation (OAC) in individuals with AF.

METHODS

For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical results of OAC to LAAC in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane. The included publications were subjected to meta-analyses using Review Manager v5.4.

RESULTS

In comparison to OAC, LAAC was linked with a decreased incidence of all stroke (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.84; p = 0.0004). LAAC was also linked to a decreased risk of hemorrhagic stroke (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.55; p = 0.002). There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of ischemic stroke (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.59-1.84; p = 0.88) or systemic embolization (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.42-2.46; p = 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our meta-analysis, the LAAC was less likely than the OAC to have a complete or hemorrhagic stroke. For the two groups, however, there was no difference in the risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolization.

Long-Term Outcome of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and High Risk of Stroke Treated with Oral Anticoagulation or Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Cardinality Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) poses a significant risk of stroke. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative for patients with contraindications to oral anticoagulation (OAC) or with high risk of bleeding. This study aims to compare the outcomes of LAAO versus conventional stroke prevention in high-risk AF-patients.

METHODS

This secondary analysis incorporates data from the prospective Swiss-AF and Beat-AF cohorts, and the Zurich LAAO Registry. Cardinality matching was performed to create two comparable cohorts: conventional treatment (92% OAC) and LAAO. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, cardiovascular (CV) death, and clinically relevant bleeding. Kaplan-Meier method with competing risk analysis was used.

RESULTS

Each group included 468 patients (age 76.4 [70.5, 82.0] years, 33% female). The LAAO group exhibited higher baseline bleeding risk (HAS BLED 2.0 [1.0-3.0] versus 3.0 [3.0-4.0]; p < 0.001). Median follow-up time: 6.0 (4.7-7.0) years in conventional treatment group and 4.0 (1.5-6.1) in LAAO group. No significant difference in the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.72-1.06, p = 0.18), stroke risk (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.66-1.97, p = 0.64), or CV mortality (HR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.82-1.42, p = 0.60) was observed between groups. LAAO correlated with a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding (HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.47-0.80, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this cardinality matched analysis with long-term follow-up, LAAO showed similar stroke and CV death rates but lower clinically relevant bleeding risk compared to conventional therapy in high-risk AF-patients.

Revisiting Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Oral Anticoagulants in Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation Management: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a significant public health problem due to its association with coronary heart disease, stroke, and mortality, especially in the elderly. Therefore, traditional warfarin therapy, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and the recent left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) have been compared as treatment approaches. In this regard, we aimed to synthesize the current evidence regarding the comparison these mentioned modalities in patients with AF. A comprehensive database search for records comparing LAAC and DOACs in patients with AF was conducted until December 15, 2023. An updated meta-analysis was conducted using fixed and random effect models to calculate odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. Eleven studies were eligible that included a total of 68171 patients. Compared to DOACs, the LAAC group had a lower rate of hospital stay duration (MD -1.23; 95% CI -1.51 to -0.95; p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between LAAC and DOACs in terms of the composite outcome of stroke, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke and thromboembolic events ischemic, major bleeding and cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.27-2.48, P = 0.73). Our meta-analysis showed a lower rate of hospital stay duration that favors LAAC. However, the risk of composite outcomes of stroke, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, thromboembolic events, ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and cardiovascular mortality was similar between the two treatment groups.

Residual Stroke Risk Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Prescribed Oral Anticoagulants: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis From COMBINE AF

BACKGROUND

Despite oral anticoagulation, patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain at risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (SE) events. For patients whose residual risk is sufficiently high, additional therapies might be useful to mitigate stroke risk.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Individual patient data from 5 landmark trials testing oral anticoagulation in AF were pooled in A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in AF (COMBINE AF). We calculated the rate of ischemic stroke/SE among oral anticoagulation-treated patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score≥2, across strata of CHA2DS2-VASc score, stroke history, and AF type, as either paroxysmal or nonparoxysmal. We included 71 794 patients with AF (median age 72 years, interquartile range, 13 years, 61.3% male) randomized to a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist, and followed for a mean of 2.1 (±0.8) years. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 (interquartile range, 3-5), 18.8% had a prior stroke, and 76.4% had nonparoxysmal AF. The overall rate of stroke/SE was 1.33%/y (95% CI, 1.27-1.39); 1.38%/y (95% CI, 1.31-1.45) for nonparoxysmal AF, and 1.15%/y (95% CI, 1.05-1.27) for paroxysmal AF. The rate of ischemic stroke/SE increased by a rate ratio of 1.36 (95% CI, 1.32-1.41) per 1-point increase in CHA2DS2-VASc, reaching 1.67%/y (95% CI, 1.59-1.75) ≥4 CHA2DS2-VASc points. Patients with both nonparoxysmal AF and CHA2DS2-VASc ≥4 had a stroke/SE rate of 1.75%/y (95% CI, 1.66-1.85). In patients with a prior stroke, the risk was 2.51%/y (95% CI, 2.33-2.71).

CONCLUSIONS

AF type, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and stroke history can identify patients with AF, who despite oral anticoagulation have a residual stroke/SE risk of 1.5% to 2.5% per year. Evaluation of additional stroke/SE prevention strategies in high-risk patients is warranted.

Left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: current status and perspectives

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of stroke and systemic embolism, and the left atrial appendage (LAA) has been identified as a principal source of thromboembolism in these patients. While oral anticoagulation is the current standard of care, LAA closure (LAAC) emerges as an alternative or complementary treatment approach to reduce the risk of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with AF. Moderate-sized randomized clinical studies have provided data for the efficacy and safety of catheter-based LAAC, largely compared with vitamin K antagonists. LAA device iterations, advances in pre- and peri-procedural imaging, and implantation techniques continue to increase the efficacy and safety of LAAC. More data about efficacy and safety of LAAC have been collected, and several randomized clinical trials are currently underway to compare LAAC with best medical care (including non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants) in different clinical settings. Surgical LAAC in patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery reduced the risk of stroke on background of anticoagulation therapy in the LAAOS III study. In this review, we describe the rapidly evolving field of LAAC and discuss recent clinical data, ongoing studies, open questions, and current limitations of LAAC.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Compared With Oral Anticoagulants for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been suggested as an alternative to long-term oral anticoagulation for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, but comparative data remain scarce. We aimed to assess ischemic and bleeding outcomes of LAAC compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention of cardioembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Embase and MEDLINE were searched for randomized trials comparing LAAC, VKAs, and DOACs. The primary efficacy end point was any stroke or systemic embolism. Treatment effects were calculated from a network meta-analysis and ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Seven trials and 73 199 patients were included. The risk of the primary end point was not statistically different between LAAC versus VKAs (odds ratio [OR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.62-1.50]) and LAAC versus DOACs (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71-1.73]). LAAC and DOACs resulted in similar risk of major or minor (OR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.61-1.42]) and major bleeding (OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.58-1.46]); however, after exclusion of procedural bleeding, bleeding risk was significantly lower in those undergoing LAAC. Both LAAC and DOACs reduced the risk of all-cause death  compared with VKAs (LAAC versus VKAs: OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53-0.91]; DOACs versus VKAs: OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85-0.95], respectively). DOACs ranked as the best treatment for stroke or systemic embolism prevention (66.9%) and LAAC for reducing major bleeding (63.9%) and death (96.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

As a nonpharmacological alternative to oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, LAAC showed similar efficacy and safety compared with VKAs or DOACs. Prospective confirmation from larger studies is warranted.

A comparison of simplified or conventional antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure in patients at high bleeding risk: the PLATEBRISK study

BACKGROUND

Antithrombotic treatment (ATT) post-left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) remains controversial. Furthermore, most of the patients undergoing LAAO are at a very high bleeding risk.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare a simplified versus conventional ATT after LAAO in very high bleeding risk patients.

METHODS

This is a multicentre, retrospective study including very high bleeding risk patients, according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definition, who underwent LAAO. These included patients at >4% risk of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding or >1% risk of intracranial bleeding after the procedure. Two groups were established based on the discharge ATT. The simplified group included single antiplatelet treatment or no treatment, and the conventional group comprised dual antiplatelet treatment or anticoagulation (combined or not with antiplatelet therapy).

RESULTS

A total of 1,135 patients were included. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.5±1.5 and 3.7±1.0, respectively. There were no differences in the composite endpoint (death, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, device-related thrombus or major bleeding) between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.11; p=0.188). Although the rate of major bleeding during the first year was numerically lower in the simplified group, it did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.41-1.10; p=0.104). Nonetheless, patients with previous major bleeding presented a significantly lower rate of major bleeding when using the simplified treatment (HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.36-0.99; p=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with very high bleeding risk, a simplified ATT after LAAO seems to be as effective as conventional protocols. Furthermore, patients with a history of major bleeding experienced a lower risk of major bleeding with the simplified ATT.

Lower rate of major bleeding in very high risk patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion: A propensity score-matched comparison with direct oral anticoagulant

BACKGROUND

Long-term oral anticoagulation is the mainstay therapy for thromboembolic (TE) prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) could be a safe alternative to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with a very high TE risk profile.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of LAAO vs DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation at very high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category] score ≥ 5).

METHODS

Data from patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 5 were extracted from a prospective multicenter database. To attenuate the imbalance in covariates between groups, propensity score matching was used (covariates: CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED [hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol] scores), which resulted in a matched population of 277 patients per group. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, TE events, and clinically relevant bleeding during follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 2381 patients, 554 very high risk patients were included in the study (mean age 79 ± 7 years; CHA2DS2-VASc score 5.8 ± 0.9; HAS-BLED score 3.0 ± 0.9). The mean follow-up duration was 25 ± 11 months. A higher incidence of the composite end point was documented with DOACs compared with LAAO (14.9 events per 100 patient-years in the DOAC group vs 9.4 events per 100 patient-years in the LAAO group; P = .03). The annualized clinically relevant bleeding risk was higher with DOACs (6.3% vs 3.2%; P = .04), while the risk of TE events was not different between groups (4.1% vs 3.2%; P = .63).

CONCLUSION

In high-risk patients, LAAO had a similar stroke prevention efficacy but a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding when compared with DOACs. The clinical benefit of LAAO became significant after 18 months of follow-up.

Impact of early bleeding on long-term mortality after left atrial appendage occlusion

BACKGROUND

Short-term antithrombotic therapy is recommended after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) to reduce the risk of device-related thrombosis. However, patients referred for LAAO have excess bleeding risk. Yet, short-term bleeding events post-LAAO are not well characterized.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the incidence of early bleeding post-LAAO and its association with long-term mortality risk. We also sought to identify predictors of early bleeding.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LAAO at Mayo Clinic between 2018 and 2023 were included. Early bleeding was defined as bleeding that occurred within 3 months of discharge. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the association between early bleeding and death and to estimate the hazard ratio. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify predictors of early bleeding.

RESULTS

Of the 592 patients included, 389 (66%) were male, and the mean age was 75.6 years. Eighty-three patients (14.0%) experienced early bleeding, with the majority having minimal (63.4%) or minor (17.3%) bleeding. At a median follow-up of 14.4 months (interquartile range 4.2-27.9 months), early bleeding after LAAO was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.07; 95% confidence interval 1.15-3.75; P = .02). A history of intracranial bleeding, nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and early device-related thrombosis were independent predictors of early bleeding. Antithrombotic therapy at discharge was not associated with early nonprocedural bleeding.

CONCLUSION

One in 7 patients experience a nonprocedural bleeding event within 90 days of LAAO. Early bleeding after LAAO is associated with a higher all-cause mortality risk during mid-term follow-up. Further studies are needed to optimize the management of patients undergoing LAAO.

Novel Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: A Comprehensive Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent cardiac arrhythmia associated with an increased risk of stroke due to disrupted heart function and potential clot formation. This review examines current management strategies for stroke prevention in AF, focusing on the efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes of anticoagulation therapies. Anticoagulants, including novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists, play a crucial role in reducing stroke risk by preventing clot formation in the heart. Recent studies highlight NOACs as superior alternatives to traditional therapies, offering improved safety profiles and enhanced patient adherence. Despite the risk of bleeding complications, judicious use of anticoagulants significantly improves clinical outcomes in AF patients. The review synthesizes evidence from clinical trials and meta-analyses to underscore the pivotal role of NOACs in transforming stroke prevention strategies in AF. Moreover, it discusses emerging interventions such as left atrial appendage occlusion and emphasizes the importance of personalized, patient-centered care in optimizing treatment decisions for AF patients at risk of stroke.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of left atrial appendage closure's influence on early and long-term mortality and stroke

Objective

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) concomitant to heart surgery in patients with underlying atrial fibrillation (AF) has gained attention because of long-term reduction of thromboembolic complications. As of mortality benefits in the setting of non-AF, data from both observational studies and randomized controlled trials are conflicting.

Methods

On-line databases were screened for studies comparing LAAC versus no LAAC concomitant to other heart surgery. End points assessed were all-cause mortality and stroke at early and longest-available follow-up. Subgroup analyses stratified on preoperative AF were performed. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs served as primary statistics.

Results

Electronic search yielded 25 studies (N = 660 [158 patients]). There was no difference between LAAC and no LAAC in terms of early mortality. In the overall population analysis, LAAC reduced long-term mortality (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.00; P = .05; I 2 = 88%), reduced early stroke risk by 19% (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72-0.93; P = .002; I 2 = 57%), and reduced late stroke risk by 13% (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90; P < .001; I 2 = 58%). Subgroup analysis showed lower mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.01; P = .06; I 2 = 91%), short-, and long-term stroke risk reduction only in patients with preoperative AF (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93; P = .003; I 2 = 71% and RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91; P < .001; I 2 = 70%, respectively). No benefit of LAAC in patients without AF was found.

Conclusions

Concomitant LAAC was associated with reduced stroke rates at early and long-term and possibly reduced all-cause mortality at the long-term follow-up but the benefits were limited to patients with preoperative AF. There is not enough evidence to support routine concomitant LAAC in non-AF settings.

Head-to-head comparison between left atrial appendage occlusion and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis study

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) was found to be non-inferior to warfarin. In non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), there is still a scarcity of data comparing LAAO versus non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Our purpose was to compare the clinical benefits between LAAO and NOACs in non-valvular AF patients. The patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome principles were used to develop the research question in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Literature searches were conducted in online scientific databases such as ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect. All important information was extracted. The random-effect model was applied to estimate all pooled effects. The Mantel-Haenszel statistical method was used to determine the pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 4411 participants from 5 studies were involved. LAAO significantly decreased the cardiovascular mortality risk compared to NOACs (RR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.42 to 0.75; p <0.01). Major bleeding risk in the LAAO group was significantly lower than in the NOACs group (RR = 0.66; RR = 0.53 to 0.82; p <0.01). A significantly lower risk of major bleeding or non-major bleeding in the patients receiving LAAO than NOACs was also observed in this meta-analysis (RR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.81; p <0.01). LAAO was superior to the NOACs in reducing cardiovascular mortality, major bleeding, and major or non-major bleeding risks in non-valvular AF patients. In high-risk thromboembolism and bleeding patients, LAAO can be considered first as a long-term treatment strategy.

Outcomes Associated With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Via Implanted Device in Atrial Fibrillation

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) via implanted device vs no LAAO in a matched cohort of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

This longitudinal retrospective cohort study was based on the national database covering hospital care for the entire French population. Adults (≥18 years of age) who had been hospitalized with AF (January 1, 2015, to January 1, 2020) who underwent LAAO were identified. Propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounders of the treatment-outcome relationship. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, major bleeding, or all-cause death during follow-up.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 1216 patients with AF who were treated with LAAO were matched with 1216 controls (patients AF who were not treated with LAAO). Mean follow-up was 14.5 months (median, 13 months; IQR, 7-21 months). Patients with LAAO had a lower risk of the composite outcome (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.55). Total events (309 for LAAO vs 640 for controls) and event rates (23.3% vs 44.0%/year, respectively) were lower for LAAO, driven primarily by a decreased risk of all-cause death (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.46; P<.0001), whereas ischemic stroke risk was higher (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.64). Significant interactions were observed in subgroups with a history of ischemic stroke (P<.001) and of bleeding (P=.002).

CONCLUSION

Among AF patients at high bleeding risk, our nationwide study highlights a high risk of clinical events during follow-up. LAAO appeared less effective than no LAAO in preventing stroke but more effective in preventing death. Left atrial appendage occlusion is particularly effective in patients with previous ischemic stroke or any episode of bleeding.

5-year stroke rates in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation after watchman compared to direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

The WATCHMAN device (Boston Scientific; Marlborough, MA, USA) is noninferior to warfarin in preventing ischemic strokes while reducing bleeding risks associated with long term anticoagulation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AFib). The device's performance compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is less well known.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 5-year major bleeding and ischemic stroke rates in patients with nonvalvular AFib who received a WATCHMAN device or DOAC therapy after a major bleeding event.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter, 1:1 matched cohort study was derived from the PearlDiver Mariner database from 2010 to 2020. Patients with nonvalvular AFib on oral anticoagulation who had a major bleeding event were identified. Those who received either WATCHMAN or DOAC after resolution of the bleeding event were selected. The two groups were exactly matched 1:1 based on various comorbidities. Rates of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and hemorrhagic stroke were compared over 5 years.

RESULTS

Each cohort consisted of 2248 patients after 1:1 matching. The mean CHADS2-VASC score was 4.81 ± 1.25. At 5 years, the WATCHMAN cohort had significantly lower rates of major bleeding events [OR 0.24 (0.21, 0.27)], TIAs [OR 0.75 (0.58, 0.95)], and ischemic strokes [OR 0.72 (0.61, 0.86)]. There was no significant difference in hemorrhagic strokes [OR 1.14 (0.83, 1.58)].

CONCLUSION

Even in a high-risk population, the WATCHMAN is comparable to DOAC therapy in the primary prevention of hemorrhagic strokes and may provide benefit in the rates of bleeding events, TIAs, and ischemic strokes.

Anticoagulation Intensity during Appendage Occlusion: Lessons from Silent Cerebral Embolism

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is associated with a high incidence of peri-procedure silent cerebral embolism (SCE), while the recommended activated clotting time (ACT) level by the expert consensus is lower than that in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The aim of our study was to investigate whether raising the targeted ACT level during LAAO to the same level as AF ablation could decrease the incidence of SCE.

METHODS

It was a prospective observational cohort study. Consecutive AF patients receiving LAAO between January 2021 and December 2022 were included and categorized into two groups based on the time of enrollment. Patients enrolled in 2021 (group 250) maintained a target ACT level of ≥250 s during LAAO procedure, while patients enrolled in 2022 (group 300) maintained the peri-procedure ACT ≥300 s. All patients underwent cerebral magnetic resonance imaging before and after the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients were included (38 in the group 250 and 43 in the group 300). After inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), patients in the group 250 showed a significantly lower incidence of SCE than group 300 (IPTW p = 0.038). Only a stable high ACT pattern could decrease the risk of SCE. No significant differences were found between other ACT change patterns on the SCE incidence.

CONCLUSION

Raising the peri-procedure ACT level to a stable 300 s could decrease the risk of the SCE without increasing the major bleeding events.

State-of-the-Art of Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an increasingly used alternative to oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation, especially in patients with absolute/relative contraindications to these therapies. This review will cover three main aspects of the procedure. In the fist part of the manuscript, we focus on patient selection. We describe three main categories of patients with primary indication to LAAO, namely patients with previous or at a high risk of intracerebral bleeding, patients with a history of major gastrointestinal bleeding and patients with end-stage renal disease and absolute contraindication to novel oral anticoagulants. Some other potential indications are also described. In the second part of the manuscript, we review available devices, trying to highlight different aspects and potential specific advantages. The last section overviews different ways for pre-, intra- and postprocedural imaging, in order to improve procedural safety and efficacy and ameliorate patient outcome. The characteristics of available contemporary devices and the role of imaging in procedural planning, intraprocedural guidance and follow-up are described.

Severity of Ischemic Stroke After Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Nonwarfarin Oral Anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Strokes after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) prophylaxis are generally less severe than those after warfarin prophylaxis-thought to be secondary to more hemorrhagic strokes with warfarin. Hemorrhagic strokes are similarly infrequent with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prophylaxis, so the primary subtype after either LAAC or DOAC prophylaxis is ischemic stroke (IS).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the severity of IS using the modified Rankin Scale in atrial fibrillation patients receiving prophylaxis with DOACs vs LAAC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive patients undergoing LAAC at 8 centers who developed an IS (ISLAAC) compared with contemporaneous consecutive patients who developed IS during treatment with DOACs (ISDOAC). The primary outcome was disabling/fatal stroke (modified Rankin Scale 3-5) at discharge and 3 months later.

RESULTS

Compared with ISDOAC patients (n = 322), ISLAAC patients (n = 125) were older (age 77.2 ± 13.4 years vs 73.1 ± 11.9 years; P = 0.002), with higher HAS-BLED scores (3.0 vs 2.0; P = 0.004) and more frequent prior bleeding events (54.4% vs 23.6%; P < 0.001), but similar CHA2DS2-VASc scores (5.0 vs 5.0; P = 0.28). Strokes were less frequently disabling/fatal with ISLAAC than ISDOAC at both hospital discharge (38.3% vs 70.3%; P < 0.001) and 3 months later (33.3% vs 56.2%; P < 0.001). Differences in stroke severity persisted after propensity score matching. By multivariate regression analysis, ISLAAC was independently associated with fewer disabling/fatal strokes at discharge (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.13-0.39; P < 0.001) and 3 months (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12-0.50; P < 0.001), and fewer deaths at 3 months (OR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.12-0.64; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation are less often disabling or fatal with LAAC than DOAC prophylaxis.

Left atrial appendage closure in very elderly patients in the French National Registry

OBJECTIVE

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is recommended to decrease the stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation and contraindications to anticoagulation. However, age-stratified data are scarce. The aim of this study was to provide information on the safety and efficacy of LAAC, with emphasis on the oldest patients.

METHODS

A nationwide, prospective, multicentre, observational registry was established by 53 French cardiology centres in 2018-2021. The composite primary endpoint included ischaemic stroke, systemic embolism, and unexplained or cardiovascular death. Separate analyses were done in the groups <80 years and ≥80 years.

RESULTS

Among the 1053 patients included, median age was 79.7 (73.6-84.3) years; 512 patients (48.6%) were aged ≥80 years. Procedure-related serious adverse events were non-significantly more common in octogenarians (7.0% vs 4.4% in patients aged <80 years, respectively; p=0.07). Despite a higher mean CHA2DS2-VASc score in octogenarians, the rate of thromboembolic events during the study was similar in both groups (3.0 vs 3.1/100 patient-years; p=0.85). By contrast, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in octogenarians (15.3 vs 10.1/100 patient-years, p<0.015), due to a higher rate of non-cardiovascular deaths (8.2 vs 4.9/100 patient-years, p=0.034). The rate of the primary endpoint was 8.1/100 patient-years overall with no statistically significant difference between age groups (9.4 and 7.0/100 patient-years; p=0.19).

CONCLUSION

Despite a higher mean CHA2DS2-VASc score in octogenarians, the rate of thromboembolic events after LAAC in this age group was similar to that in patients aged <80 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03434015).

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: Our Current Failures and Required Research

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is a common rhythm disorder of middle-aged to older adults that can cause ischemic strokes and systemic embolism. Lifelong use of oral anticoagulants reduces the risk of these ischemic events but increases the risk of major and clinically relevant hemorrhages. These medications also require strict compliance for efficacy, and they have nontrivial failure rates in higher-risk patients. Left atrial appendage closure is a nonpharmacological method to prevent ischemic strokes in atrial fibrillation without the need for lifelong anticoagulant use, but this procedure has the potential for complications and residual embolic events. This workshop of the Roundtable of Academia and Industry for Stroke Prevention discussed future research needed to further decrease the ischemic and hemorrhagic risks among patients with atrial fibrillation. A direct thrombin inhibitor, factor Xa inhibitors, and left atrial appendage closure are FDA-approved approaches whereas factor XIa inhibitors are currently being studied in phase 3 randomized controlled trials for stroke prevention. The benefits, risks, and shortcomings of these treatments and future research required in different high-risk patient populations are reviewed in this consensus statement.

Anticoagulants versus Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Co-Morbid Thrombocytopenia

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative approach to anticoagulants. Nonetheless, data regarding the outcomes of LAAC procedures in patients with thrombocytopenia remain lacking. The primary objective was to determine the incidence of the composite endpoint comprising ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, major bleeding, and cardiac cause of death among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and thrombocytopenia who were either undergoing LAAC or receiving oral anticoagulants. The secondary endpoint was the determination of total mortality. Data from a prospective, single-center registry of patients undergoing LAAC procedures were analyzed. A subset of 50 consecutive patients with thrombocytopenia were selected. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a thrombocyte count below 150,000. Subsequently, from patients hospitalized with AF receiving oral anticoagulants, 50 patients were further chosen based on propensity score matching, ensuring comparability with the study group. The primary endpoint occurred in 2% of patients in the LAAC group and 10% of patients in the non-LAAC group (p = 0.097). Additionally, a significant difference was noted in the occurrence of the secondary endpoint, which was observed in 0% of patients in the LAAC group and 10% of patients in the non-LAAC group (p = 0.025). In patients with thrombocytopenia the LAAC procedure improves prognosis compared with continued anticoagulant treatment.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Closure and Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials and Observational Studies

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This meta-analysis was conducted as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Two investigators performed an online database search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from inception to October 31, 2023, without any language or time restrictions. Outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and major bleeding events. Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis, enrolling 7,629 participants with AF (4,287 in the DOAC group and 3,342 in the LAAC group). The pooled analysis showed that the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients in the DOAC group compared to LAAC (relative risk (RR): 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50 to 2.34). The risk of cardiovascular mortality was 1.60 times higher in patients receiving DOACs compared to those receiving LAAC (RR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.12 to 2.28). The risk of stroke was not significantly different between the two groups (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.41). In conclusion, LAAC for AF patients proves to be safe and effective for stroke prevention, exhibiting a superior profile in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and major bleeding compared to oral anticoagulation (OAC). These findings prompt consideration of LAAC as a preferred treatment for cardiovascular event prevention in high-bleeding-risk patients.

The Left Atrial Appendage and Atrial Fibrillation-A Contemporary Review

In patients with atrial fibrillation, the left atrial appendage may serve as the site of thrombus formation due to stasis that occurs within the appendage because of its shape and trabeculations. Although thrombus formation can be reduced by using anticoagulants, this may be contraindicated in some patients. The need for a better alternative treatment prompted the study of left atrial appendage occlusion for thromboembolism prophylaxis. Due to this, procedures that excise or occlude the left atrial appendage have gained attention because of their ability to prevent thromboembolic events. This article provides a comprehensive review of the left atrial appendage and its associated procedures' clinical utility.

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.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcomes

BACKGROUND

LAAO is an emerging option for thromboembolic event prevention in patients with NVAF. We previously reported data on comparison between LAAO and DOAC at two-year follow-up in NVAF patients at HBR (HAS-BLED ≥3).

AIMS

Limited data are available on long term follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LAAO indication after 5 years.

METHODS

We enrolled 193 HBR treated with LAAO and 189 HBR patients with DOACs. At baseline, LAAO group had higher HAS-BLED (4.2 vs 3.3, p < 0.001) and lower CHADS-VASc (4.3 vs. 4.7, p = 0.005). After 1:1 PSM, 192 patients were included (LAAO n = 96; DOACs n = 96).

RESULTS

At 5-year follow-up the rate of the combined safety and effectiveness endpoint (ISTH major bleeding and thromboembolic events) was significantly higher in LAAO group (p = 0.042), driven by a higher number of thromboembolic events (p = 0.047). The rate of ISTH-major bleeding events was similar (p = 0.221). After PSM no significant difference in the primary effectiveness (LAAO 13.3% vs DOACs 9.5%, p = 0.357) and safety endpoint (LAAO 7.5% vs DOACs 7.5%; p = 0.918) were evident. Overall bleeding rate was significantly higher in DOACs group (25.0% vs 13.7%, p = 0.048), while a non-significant higher number of TIA was reported in LAAO group (5.4% vs 1.1%, p = 0.098). All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were higher in LAAO group at both unmatched and matched analysis.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed safety and effectiveness of both DOAC and LAAO in NVAF patients at HBR, with no significant differences in thromboembolic events or major bleeding were at 5-year follow-up. The observed increased mortality after LAAO warrants further investigations in RCTs.

Rationale and design of a randomized study comparing the Watchman FLX device to DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) was developed as a nonpharmacologic alternative to oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at an increased risk for stroke or systemic embolism. The Watchman device permanently seals off the LAA to prevent thrombi from escaping into the circulation. Previous randomized trials have established the safety and efficacy of LAAC compared to warfarin. However, direct OACs (DOACs) have become the preferred pharmacologic strategy for stroke prevention in patients with AF, and there is limited data comparing Watchman FLX to DOACs in a broad AF patient population. CHAMPION-AF is designed to prospectively determine whether LAAC with Watchman FLX is a reasonable first-line alternative to DOACs in patients with AF who are indicated for OAC therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 3,000 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) were randomized to Watchman FLX or DOAC in a 1:1 allocation at 142 global clinical sites. Patients in the device arm were to be treated with DOAC and aspirin, DOAC alone, or DAPT for at least 3 months postimplant followed by aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-year. Control patients were required to take an approved DOAC for the duration of the trial. Clinical follow-up visits are scheduled at 3- and 12-months, and then annually through 5 years; LAA imaging is required at 4 months in the device group. Two primary end points will be evaluated at 3 years: (1) composite of stroke (ischemic/hemorrhagic), cardiovascular death, and systemic embolism compared for noninferiority, and (2) nonprocedural bleeding (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding) tested for superiority in the device arm against DOACs. The third primary noninferiority end point is the composite of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism at 5 years. Secondary end points include 3- and 5-year rates of (1) ISTH-defined major bleeding and (2) the composite of cardiovascular death, all stroke, systemic embolism, and nonprocedural ISTH bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will prospectively evaluate whether LAAC with the Watchman FLX device is a reasonable alternative to DOACs in patients with AF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04394546.

Efficacy of Left Atrial Appendage Closure and Oral Anticoagulation After Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) proved to be noninferior to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in nonablated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LAAC with those of OAC therapy in patients after AF ablation. This study included patients who underwent catheter ablation (CA) of AF between January 2016 and December 2020. The cohort was divided into CA + LAAC and CA + OAC, where propensity score matching was used to select controls, and each group contained 682 subjects. The enrolled patients' mean age was 70.34 ± 8.32 years, and 47.3% were female; their CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.48 ± 1.17. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. After a 3-year mean follow-up, the incidence of thromboembolic events was 1.25 and 1.10 and that of major bleeding events was 0.65 and 1.72 per 100 patient-years in the CA + LAAC, and CA + OAC groups, respectively. The rate of thromboembolisms and major adverse cardiovascular events was similar between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR] 1.162, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.665 to 2.030, p = 0.598, HR 0.711, 95% CI 0.502 to 1.005, p = 0.053); however, that of major bleeding and all-cause death was significantly reduced with LAAC (HR 0.401, 95% CI 0.216 to 0.746, p = 0.004, HR 0.528, 95% CI 0.281 to 0.989, p = 0.046). There was no significant difference in periprocedural complications (p >0.05) and the rate of AF recurrence (OAC vs LAAC: 39.44% vs 40.62%, p = 0.658). LAAC is a reasonable and safer alternative to OAC therapy in high-risk patients after AF ablation.

Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure compared with oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched studies

Backgrounds

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the PROTECT-AF and the PREVAIL, showed that in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is comparable to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in the prevention of stroke and could also possibly reduce mortality. Nevertheless, this net clinical benefit was not confirmed in the most recent RCT comparing LAAC vs. OAC, the PRAGUE-17 trial.

Aim

aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAAC compared with OAC among available high-quality studies.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library) was performed to identify eligible RCTs and observational studies with propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Outcomes of interest were the occurrence of cardiovascular death (CVD), all-cause death, all-type stroke, and major bleedings.

Results

A total of 3 RCTs and 7 PMS studies involving 25,700 patients were identified. 12,961 patients received LAAC while 12,739 received OAC therapy. After a median follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 2-4.4), patients who received LAAC had lower risk of CVD (RR = 0.62; 95%CI, 0.51-0.74, I2 = 0%), all-cause death (RR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.78, I2 68%) and major bleedings (RR = 0.68; 95%CI, 0.48-0.95 I2 = 87%) compared with patients on OAC. No difference was found between the two groups regarding strokes incidence (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.15, I2 = 0%).

Conclusions

According to this meta-analysis, LAAC has comparable efficacy in the prevention of stroke compared with OAC and a reduced risk of major bleedings, all-cause death and CVD that may be even larger with longer follow-up.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269768, identifier CRD42021269768.

Detecting Selection Bias in Observational Studies-When Interventions Work Too Fast

This Viewpoint discusses the limitations that observational studies have in drawing causal inferences.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Under Miniaturized Transesophageal Echocardiographic Guidance and Conscious Sedation: Multicenter European Experience

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) procedures are widely guided by standard transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) probes, requiring general anesthesia in most patients. The use of miniaturized TEE probes allows for LAAO guidance under local anesthesia and offers an attractive imaging alternative to standard TEE probes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of miniaturized TEE probes for procedural guidance of LAAO.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective observational study of LAAO procedures performed under miniaturized TEE guidance and conscious sedation. The primary efficacy endpoint was technical success. The secondary efficacy endpoint was procedural success (technical success without major periprocedural complications). The safety outcome was a composite of major periprocedural complications.

RESULTS

A total of 546 consecutive LAAO procedures were performed in 5 European centers. Technical success was achieved in 534 (98.0%) patients. Sixteen major periprocedural complications occurred in 15 (2.9%) patients, yielding a procedural success rate of 97.0%. Conversion to general anesthesia was required in 4 (0.7%) patients. Short-term imaging follow-up was available in 422 patients with an incidence of major (>5 mm) TEE-detected residual leaks of 0.7%, complete LAA occlusion of 82.2% on cardiac computed tomography, and device-related thrombus of 5%. As compared with procedural 2-dimensional imaging for device sizing, preprocedural assessment by 3-dimensional imaging resulted in improved technical success (100% vs 95.0%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LAAO under conscious sedation and miniaturized TEE guidance is safe and feasible with a high rate of technical success and a low rate of periprocedural complications.

Atrial fibrillation and stroke prevention: 25 years of research at EP Europace journal

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is one pillar of the management of this common arrhythmia. Substantial advances in the epidemiology and associated pathophysiology underlying AF-related stroke and thrombo-embolism are evident. Furthermore, the introduction of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (also called direct oral anticoagulants) has clearly changed our approach to stroke prevention in AF, such that the default should be to offer oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention, unless the patient is at low risk. A strategy of early rhythm control is also beneficial in reducing strokes in selected patients with recent onset AF, when compared to rate control. Cardiovascular risk factor management, with optimization of comorbidities and attention to lifestyle factors, and the patient's psychological morbidity are also essential. Finally, in selected patients with absolute contraindications to long-term oral anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion or exclusion may be considered. The aim of this state-of-the-art review article is to provide an overview of the current status of AF-related stroke and prevention strategies. A holistic or integrated care approach to AF management is recommended to minimize the risk of stroke in patients with AF, based on the evidence-based Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, as follows: A: Avoid stroke with Anticoagulation; B: Better patient-centred, symptom-directed decisions on rate or rhythm control; C: Cardiovascular risk factor and comorbidity optimization, including lifestyle changes.

An Updated Meta-Analysis on the Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

The availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with known lower bleeding risk compared with warfarin have raised questions about the role of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes for LAAC versus DOACs. All studies directly comparing LAAC with DOACs up to January 2023 were included. The outcomes studied included the combined major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events outcomes, ischemic stroke and thromboembolic events, major bleeding, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence interval were extracted or estimated from the data and pooled together with a random-effects model. A total of 7 studies (1 randomized controlled trial, 6 propensity-matched observational studies) were finally included, with a pooled population of 4,383 patients who underwent LAAC and 4,554 patients on DOACs. There were no significant differences between patients who underwent LAAC and patients on DOACs in terms of baseline age (75.0 vs 74.7, p = 0.27), CHA2DS2-VASc score (5.1 vs 5.1, p = 0.33), or HAS-BLED score (3.3 vs 3.3, p = 0.36). After a mean weighted follow-up of 22.0 months, LAAC was associated with significantly lower rates of combined major adverse CV event outcomes (HR 0.73 [0.56 to 0.95], p = 0.02), all-cause mortality (HR 0.68 [0.54 to 0.86], p = 0.02), and CV mortality (HR 0.55 [0.41 to 0.72], p<0.01). There were no significant differences in the rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (HR 1.12 [0.92 to 1.35], p = 0.25), major bleeding (HR 0.94 [0.67 to 1.32], p = 0.71), or hemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.07 [0.74 to 1.54], p = 0.74) between LAAC and DOAC. In conclusion, percutaneous LAAC was found to be as efficacious as DOACs for stroke prevention, with lower all-cause and CV mortality. The rates of major bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke were similar. LAAC has a potential role to play in stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation in the era of DOACs, but further randomized data are needed.

Structured Rehabilitation for Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Based on an Integrated Care Approach: Protocol for a Prospective, Observational Cohort Study

Background

Guideline-recommended integrated care based on the ABC (Atrial fibrillation Better Care) pathway for "general" patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) improves clinical outcomes, as demonstrated in our prior mobile Atrial Fibrillation Application (mAFA)-II cluster randomized trial. The present study aims to investigate whether mAFA III-supported structured follow-up rehabilitation packages adapted to patient risk profiles and different treatment patterns (eg, for patients receiving drug treatment only, AF ablation, or left atrial appendage occlusion [LAAO]) will improve guideline adherence and reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular events.

Methods and Analysis

In this prospective, observational mAFA III pilot cohort study, patients with AF aged ≥ 18 years will be enrolled using the mAFA III App for self-management. Assuming an annual rate of composite outcome of "ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism, all-cause death and cardiovascular hospitalization" of 29.3% for non-ABC pathway compliance compared with 20.8% for ABC pathway compliance, at least 1475 patients would be needed to detect the outcome of the A, B and C components of the ABC pathway, assuming a withdrawal rate of 20% in the first year. The primary endpoint is adherence to guidelines regarding the A, B and C components of the ABC pathway. Ancillary analyses will be performed to determine the impact of the ABC pathway using smart technologies on the outcomes among the "high-risk" population (eg, ≥75 years old, with multimorbidities, with polypharmacy) and the application of artificial intelligence machine-learning AF risk prediction management in assessing AF recurrence. The individualised anticoagulants with AF burden will be monitored by smart devices.

Trial Registration Number

ISRCTN13724416.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding associated with oral anticoagulants

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has shown non-inferiority compared to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in preventing atrial fibrillation (AF)-related stroke. The objective of this study was to assess whether LAAC reduces the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and/or chronic anaemia associated with OAC, as well as the consumption of healthcare resources.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective, single-center study from 2016 to 2022, LAAC was performed. Clinical, analytical and healthcare resource consumption data were collected (endoscopies, blood transfusions, hospital admissions) prior and 6 months after LAAC.

RESULTS

43 patients were included, with an average age of 77.6 years. LAAC indication was upper, low and obscure GIB in 7 (16%), 8 (19%) and 28 patients (65%) respectively. GIB source was intestinal angiodysplasias in 27 patients (63%), occult origin in 12 (28%), and others (antral vascular ectasia, portal hypertension gastropathy, etc.) in 4 patients (9%). The mean number of packed red blood cells per patient before LAAC was (mean ± SD) 7.29 ± 5 vs 0.42 ± 1.3 (p < 0.001); endoscopic procedures were 4.34 ± 2.85 vs 0.27 ± 0.76 (p < 0.001); and hospitalizations 2.67 ± 2.14 vs 0.03 ± 0.17 (p < 0.001), with a hospital stay of 21.5 ± 17.3 vs 0.09 ± 0.5 days (p < 0.001) at 6 months post-intervention. Haemoglobin value increased from 8.1 ± 1.2g/dl to 12.4 ± 2.2g/dl (p < 0.001) at 6 months. No thromboembolic events were registered during a median follow-up of 16.6 months (range 6-65).

CONCLUSIONS

LAAC could be a safe and effective alternative to OAC in patients with non-valvular AF presenting significant, recurrent or potentially unresolvable GIB. This intervention also leads to important savings in the consumption of healthcare resources.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion-A Choice or a Last Resort? How to Approach the Patient

Left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is emerging as a viable alternative to oral anticoagulation in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. However, there remains limited evidence for this approach, especially in certain subgroups, and therefore patient selection is an important aspect of treatment. Here, the authors present arguments for LAA occlusion as either a last resort versus patient choice by evaluating contemporary studies on this topic and discuss practical steps in the approach of patients who may be suitable for LAA occlusion. Overall, an individualized and multidisciplinary team approach should be adopted in patients who are being considered for LAA occlusion.

The Strengths and Weaknesses of the LAA Covering Disc Occluders-Conceptually and in Practice

Endocardial left atrial appendage (LAA) occluders with a covering disc encompass a wide range of devices that share the common feature of a distal anchoring "body" and proximal covering "disc" design. This unique design feature has potential advantages in certain complex LAA anatomies and challenging clinical scenarios. The current review article summarizes the different features of established and novel devices, preprocedural imaging updates, intraprocedural technical considerations, and postprocedural follow-up issues specific to this category of LAA occluders.

Leap or lag: left atrial appendage closure and guidelines

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with life-threatening thromboembolism. Most emboli stem from thrombosis in the left atrial appendage (LAA). The current treatment of choice is oral anticoagulants (OACs), but a small proportion of patients cannot take OACs predominantly because of the so-called unacceptable bleeding risks. However, many who initially accept OACs subsequently stop therapy or reduce the OAC treatment to a potentially non-effective dose leaving them exposed to thromboembolic risk. A relatively simple alternative therapy involves the catheter-based insertion of a LAA closure (LAAC) device to prevent thromboembolism from the LAA. There is a considerable evidence base for this therapy consisting of clinical trials and observational data which suggests comparable therapeutic efficacy with a possible small excess of ischaemic strokes. Although LAAC has been very closely examined by regulators and approved for market release, guidelines from most professional societies give only weak recommendations for use of this device which may be the only known effective therapy available to some at-risk AF patients. Guidance materials from the same societies more enthusiastically endorse LAAC. Clinical practice is running well ahead of the guidelines because equipoise has been lost by physicians faced with patients for whom they have no other effective therapy. Guideline writers are correct in providing recommendations which are less strong for LAAC than for OACs, for those who are able and willing to take OAC treatment, but for those who are not, a stronger recommendation is needed. But, should the guidelines lag behind or leap ahead of the available evidence?

Sex Differences in Periprocedural and Long-Term Outcomes Following Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is among the most common arrhythmias associated with an increased risk of cardioembolic phenomena, including stroke. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has proven beneficial in reducing stroke and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation who have contraindications to anticoagulation. However, the sex differences in outcomes following LAAO have not been studied systematically.

METHODS

Electronic databases PUBMED, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched until March 2022 for studies evaluating patient outcomes following LAAO for AF. The primary outcomes of interest were the risks of periprocedural stroke, major bleeding, pericardial complications, and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included stroke risks, major bleeding, device-related thrombus, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality on long-term follow-up. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I-squared test.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the final analysis encompassing 111,775 patients, out of which 45,441 (40.7 %) were women. Women had a significantly higher risk of peri-procedural complications including all-cause mortality [relative risk (RR), 95 % confidence intervals (CI); RR 1.94, 95 % CI 1.40-2.69], stroke [RR 1.85, 95 % CI 1.29-2.67], major bleeding [RR 1.63, 95 % CI 1.08-2.44], and pericardial events [RR 1.80, 95 % CI 1.58-2.05]. However, there were no statistically significant differences between sexes in terms of risk of stroke, major bleeding, device-related thrombus, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality on long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Among patients undergoing LAAO implantation, women were at higher risk of periprocedural complications than men. This risk was not significant on long-term follow-up.

Clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with DOACs in a specialized anticoagulation center: Critical appraisal of real-world data

AIMS

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are progressively replacing vitamin K antagonists in the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, their real-world clinical outcomes appear to be contradictory, with some studies reporting fewer and others reporting higher complications than the pivotal randomized controlled trials. We present the results of a clinical model for the management of DOACs in real clinical practice and provide a review of the literature.

METHODS

The MACACOD project is an ongoing, observational, prospective, single-center study with unselected patients that focuses on rigorous DOAC selection, an educational visit, laboratory measurements, and strict follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 1,259 patients were included. The composite incidence of major complications was 4.93% py in the whole cohort vs 4.49% py in the edoxaban cohort. The rate of all-cause mortality was 6.11% py for all DOACs vs 5.12% py for edoxaban. There weren't differences across sex or between Edoxaban reduced or standard doses. However, there were differences across ages, with a higher incidence of major bleeding complications in patients >85 years (5.13% py vs 1.69% py in <75 years).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed an incidence of serious complications of 4.93% py, in which severe bleeding predominated (3.65% py). Considering our results, more specialized attention seems necessary to reduce the incidence of severe complications and also a more critical view of the literature. Considering our results, and our indirect comparison with many real-world studies, more specialized attention seems necessary to reduce the incidence of severe complications in AF patients receiving DOACs.

Two-Year Outcomes With a Next-Generation Left Atrial Appendage Device: Final Results of the PINNACLE FLX Trial

Background The PINNACLE FLX (Protection Against Embolism for Non-valvular AF [Atrial Fibrillation] Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA [Left Atrial Appendage] Closure Technology) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device (WATCHMAN FLX; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). At 1 year, the study met the primary end points of safety and anatomical efficacy/appendage closure. This final report of the PINNACLE FLX trial includes the prespecified secondary end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 2 years, also making it the first report of 2-year outcomes with this next-generation left atrial appendage closure device. Methods and Results Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women), with an appropriate rationale for left atrial appendage closure, were enrolled to receive the left atrial appendage closure device at 29 US centers. Adverse events were assessed by an independent clinical events committee, and imaging was assessed by independent core laboratories. Among 395 implanted patients (36% women; mean age, 74 years; CHA₂DS₂-VASc, 4.2±1.5), the secondary efficacy end point of 2-year ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was met, with an absolute rate of 3.4% (annualized rate, 1.7%) and an upper 1-sided 95% confidence bound of 5.3%, which was superior to the 8.7% performance goal. Two-year rates of adverse events were as follows: 9.3% all-cause mortality, 5.5% cardiovascular death, 3.4% all stroke, and 10.1% major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5). There were no additional systemic embolisms, device embolizations, pericardial effusions, or symptomatic device-related thrombi after 1 year. Conclusions The secondary end point of 2-year stroke or systemic embolism was met at 3.4%. In these final results of the PINNACLE FLX trial, the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX device demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy outcomes.

Comparative Effectiveness of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Oral Anticoagulation by Sex

BACKGROUND

The comparative real-world outcomes of older patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with anticoagulation compared with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) may be different from those in clinical trials because of differences in anticoagulation strategies and patient demographics, including a greater proportion of women. We sought to compare real-world outcomes between older patients with AF treated with anticoagulation and those treated with LAAO by sex.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims data from 2015 to 2019, we identified LAAO-eligible beneficiaries and divided them into sex subgroups. Patients receiving LAAO were matched 1:1 to those receiving anticoagulation alone through propensity score matching. The risks of mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, and bleeding were compared between matched groups with adjustment for potential confounding characteristics in Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among women, 4085 LAAO recipients were matched 1:1 to those receiving anticoagulation; among men, 5378 LAAO recipients were similarly matched. LAAO was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of mortality for women and men (hazard ratio [HR], 0.509 [95% CI, 0.447-0.580]; and HR, 0.541 [95% CI, 0.487-0.601], respectively; P<0.0001), with a similar finding for stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.655 [95% CI, 0.555-0.772]; and HR, 0.649 [95% CI, 0.552-0.762], respectively; P<0.0001). Bleeding risk was significantly greater in LAAO recipients early after implantation but lower after the 6-week periprocedural period for women and men (HR, 0.772 [95% CI, 0.676-0.882]; and HR, 0.881 [95% CI, 0.784-0.989], respectively; P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world population of older Medicare beneficiaries with AF, compared with anticoagulation, LAAO was associated with a reduction in the risk of death, stroke, and long-term bleeding among women and men. These findings should be incorporated into shared decision-making with patients considering strategies for reduction in AF-related stroke.

Left atrial appendage occlusion

Prevention of stroke represents a goal of primary importance in health systems due to its associated morbidity and mortality. As several patient groups with increased stroke rates have been identified, multiple approaches have been developed and implemented: oral anticoagulation (OAC) for patients with atrial fibrillation, surgical and percutaneous revascularisation in patients with carotid disease, device closure for patients with patent foramen ovale, and now, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for selected patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The latter group of patients are the focus of this review which evaluates the pathophysiology, selection of patients, procedural performance, outcomes of treatment both during and post-procedure, adjunctive therapy, complications, and longer-term outcomes.

Clinical relevance of incomplete device endothelialization after left atrial appendage closure

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the incidence, potential risk factors and clinical impact of incomplete device endothelialization(IDE) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC).

METHODS

A total of 101 consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent successful LAAC and received antithrombotic treatment using a standard regimen were prospectively followed up to 6 months after the procedure. The status of device endothelialization and device-related thrombus (DRT) were evaluated using cardiac computed tomography (CT). Major adverse cardio-cerebral events (MACCE) including all-cause death, heart failure(HF) hospitalization, acute ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack(TIA), peripheral vascular embolism, and major bleeding were recorded.

RESULTS

IDE was detected in 65 (64.4%) patients. Patients with IDE or complete device endothelialization (CDE) did not significantly differ with respect to baseline clinical characteristics and interventional procedure features. Multivariate analysis model revealed that persistent AF, left atrial appendage ostial diameter and left atrial size were independent risk factors for IDE. During 6-month follow-up, the incidence of DRT was 4.6% in patients with IDE and 2.8% in those with CDE, respectively (p > 0.05), and the overall rate of MACCE was non-significantly higher in the IDE group (7.7% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

IDE is common after LAAC, especially in patients with persistent AF, higher left atrial appendage ostial diameter and left atrial size. IDE confers an increased risk for DRT, but may be not necessarily associated with thromboembolic events and poor clinical outcome, providing careful monitoring and continued antithrombotic therapy are given.

Long-Term Outcomes of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure to Oral Anticoagulation for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) has been considered the standard of care for stroke prophylaxis for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; however, many individuals are unable or unwilling to take long-term OAC. The safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) have been controversial, and new trial data have recently emerged. We therefore sought to perform an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing OAC to percutaneous LAAC, focusing on individual clinical endpoints.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2000 through December 2021 for all RCTs comparing percutaneous LAAC to OAC in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Fixed and random effects meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) were performed using the longest follow-up duration available by intention-to-treat. The prespecified primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

Results

Three RCTs enrolling 1516 patients were identified. The weighted mean follow-up was 54.7 months. LAAC was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.96; p = 0.023), hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.61; p = 0.003), and major nonprocedural bleeding (HR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between LAAC and OAC for any other endpoints.

Conclusions

The available evidence from RCTs suggests LAAC therapy is associated with reduced long-term risk of death compared with OAC. This may be driven by reductions in hemorrhagic stroke and major nonprocedural bleeding. There were no significant differences in the risk of all stroke. Further large-scale clinical trials are needed to validate these findings.

Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly >75 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there is a limited understanding of LAAC in elderly patients (≥75 years old). We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the procedural complications and long-term outcomes after LAAC in the elderly versus the non-elderly. Methods: We screened PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Procedural endpoints of interest included successful implantation LAAC rates, in-hospital mortality, major bleeding events, pericardial effusion/tamponade, stroke, and vascular access complications related to LAAC. Long-term outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding events, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) during follow-up. Results: Finally, 12 studies were included in the analysis; these included a total of 25,094 people in the elderly group and 36,035 people in the non-elderly group. The successful implantation LAAC rates did not differ between the groups, while the elderly patients experienced more periprocedural mortality (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.79−3.83, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), pericardial effusion/tamponade (OR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.06−1.82, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), major bleeding events (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.17−1.48, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), and vascular access complications (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.16−1.55, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) than the non-elderly patients. The long-term stroke/TIA rates did not differ between the elderly and the non-elderly at least one year after follow-up. Conclusions: Even though successful implantation LAAC rates are similar, elderly patients have a significantly higher incidence of periprocedural mortality, major bleeding events, vascular access complications, and pericardial effusion/tamponade after LAAC than non-elderly patients. The stroke/TIA rates did not differ between both groups after at least one-year follow-up.

Morphological changes in the orifices of the left atrial appendage and left atrium in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

As an integral part of the left atrium (LA), the left atrial appendage (LAA) plays an important role in atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the relationship between LAA remodeling and AF has not been clearly defined. This retrospective case-control study aimed to assess the morphological and functional features of the LA and the LAA in AF patients using images obtained by computed tomography angiography (CTA).

METHODS

A total of 140 AF patients and 64 patients without AF or other cardiovascular diseases who underwent CTA scans between September 2016 and August 2017 were enrolled in this observational study as the experimental and the control groups, respectively. The major and minor axes, area, and perimeter of the LAA orifice, the LAA depth, and the volume of both the LAA and LA were analyzed. The data of the AF group and the control group were compared. The t-test was used to analyze the normally distributed data, and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for abnormally distributed data. The best critical value of predictors of AF was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The correlation of the LAA volume change with the major and minor axes, area, and perimeter of the LAA orifice, and the LAA depth were analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The LAA orifice's minor axis, LAA volume, and LA volume were significantly greater (P=0.004, P=0.010, and P<0.001, respectively) in patients with AF than in those without AF. The LAA volume [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01 to 1.30; P=0.038] and LA volume (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.07; P<0.001) were significantly independent predictors of AF. An LAA volume of 8.75 mL had the highest predictive value for AF [area under the curve (AUC), 0.612], with a sensitivity of 76.6% and a specificity of 48.6%. In contrast, an LA volume of 97.15 mL had the highest predictive value for AF (AUC, 0.771), with a sensitivity of 90.6% and a specificity of 53.6%. The change of LAA volume was positively weakly correlated with the area and perimeter of the LAA orifice (r=0.1703 and r=0.1378, respectively). The LAA emptying fraction was negatively correlated with the major axis and the area of the LAA orifice. The major and minor axes, area, and perimeter of the LAA orifice, and LAA depth were significantly greater in female than in male patients (P=0.003, P=0.003, P=0.001, P=0.019, and P<0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The AF patients had a longer minor axis of the LAA orifice than that of the control group, resulting in a more circular LAA orifice. The LAA orifice area and perimeter were positively correlated with LAA volume change. The LAA orifice major and minor axes, area, and perimeter, and the LAA depth of the female patients were significantly greater than those of their male counterparts in AF patients.

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Comparison to Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Background This study aimed to compare percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results Using a US administrative database, 562 850 patients with atrial fibrillation were identified, among whom 8397 were treated with LAAO and 554 453 were treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants between March 13, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was a composite end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. The mean age was 76.4±7.6 years; 280 097 (49.8%) were female. Mean follow-up was 1.5±1.0 years. LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [0.84-1.03]), or the secondary outcomes including ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 1.07 [0.81-1.41]), and intracranial bleeding (HR, 1.08 [0.72-1.61]). LAAO was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.22 [1.05-1.42], P=0.01) and a lower risk of mortality (HR, 0.73 [0.64-0.84], P<0.001). The lower risk of mortality associated with LAAO was most pronounced in patients with a prior history of intracranial bleeding. Conclusions In comparison to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome and a lower risk of mortality, which suggests LAAO might be a reasonable option in select patients with atrial fibrillation. The observation of higher bleeding risk associated with LAAO highlights the need to optimize postprocedural antithrombotic regimens as well as systematic efforts to assess and address bleeding predispositions.