Key result
LAAC serves as a mechanical alternative to OAC for stroke prevention in NVAF with bleeding risks.
Why the study?
Many patients with non-valvular AF are not treated with oral anticoagulation due to contraindications including bleeding, making LAA closure an emerging mechanical alternative.
Does left atrial appendage closure prevent stroke and reduce bleeding compared to oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Does left atrial appendage closure prevent stroke and reduce bleeding compared to oral anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
LAA closure has emerged as a safe and non-inferior mechanical alternative to oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in non-valvular AF, particularly for patients with contraindications to anticoagulation.
LAA closure offers stroke prevention for anticoagulation-ineligible AF; extends RCT evidence to this high-risk population.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a worldwide epidemic associated with significant morbidity and mortality, often due to disabling or fatal thromboembolic stroke. Oral anticoagulation is highly effective at preventing ischaemic stroke and improving all-cause survival in patients with non-valvular AF. Despite the efficacy of oral anticoagulation, many patients are not treated due to either absolute or perceived contraindications to therapy, including bleeding. Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has emerged as a mechanical alternative to pharmacologic stroke prevention. Initial and mid-term clinical trial data suggest that LAA closure is safe, with less intracranial bleeding, and a net clinical benefit that appears to be non-inferior to oral anticoagulation. However, concern remains over the possible increased risk of ischaemic stroke in long-term follow-up. Careful patient selection for LAA closure is paramount. Patients with prior intracranial bleeding or recurrent serious bleeding who are not eligible for long-term oral anticoagulation are typical candidates for LAA closure; however, other populations may benefit as well, such as patients with end-stage renal disease. Clinical investigation and randomized trials are needed to clarify the best methods of LAA occlusion, optimal pharmacologic strategies in the short-term after LAA closure, and to identify patient populations who will derive the most benefit from LAA occlusion. In this article, we review the rationale for LAA closure, the currently available devices and their evidence base, patient selection, challenges in management, and future directions for LAA closure science.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Piccini et al. (2016) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Left atrial appendage closure vs. Oral anticoagulation was evaluated. Left atrial appendage closure serves as a mechanical alternative to oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, particularly for patients with bleeding risks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: