Key result
LAAO in AF with prior ICH is linked to ~90% lower bleeding and ischemic rates.
Why the study?
Data on LAAO in patients with prior ICH are scarce, the timing of the procedure is controversial, and long-term outcomes have not been described.
Does early left atrial appendage occlusion improve outcomes compared to late occlusion in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and prior intracranial hemorrhage?
Observational (n=128)
Yes
Does early left atrial appendage occlusion improve outcomes compared to late occlusion in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and prior intracranial hemorrhage?
Early left atrial appendage occlusion (within 90 days of intracranial hemorrhage) appears as safe and effective as late occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation.
LAAO appears feasible with high success in AF and prior ICH; leaves open whether early versus late closure or net benefit versus anticoagulation warrants randomized confirmation.
Oral anticoagulation (OAC) use increases the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥ 2. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative to OAC, however data about its use in patients with prior ICH is scarce and the timing of its performance is controversial. Furthermore, the long-term outcomes in this group of patients have not been described previously. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAAO in patients with non-valvular AF and prior ICH (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥ 2) and to determine adequate timing of its performance. This is a multicenter retrospective registry that included 128 patients, whose indication for this procedure was ICH. Patients were divided into two groups: early occlusion ( n = 31; 24.2%), in which the procedure was performed before 90 days had elapsed after the bleeding, and late occlusion ( n = 97; 75.8%), after 90 days. Global procedural success was of 97% (124/128). Procedure-related complications occurred in 4 patients (3.15%): 2 cardiac tamponade, 1 device embolization and 1 transient ischemic attack during hospitalization. There was a significant reduction in the ischemic and bleeding rates compared to expected based on CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HASBLED scores (93.9% and 89.9% respectively) after a mean follow-up of 73.9 ± 34.1 months. There were no significant differences neither in baseline characteristics between the early and late occlusion groups nor in the procedural success or complications rates. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were found in mortality, ischemic events, or hemorrhage between the early and late occlusion group. Left atrial appendage occlusion is an effective and safe treatment alternative to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke in selected patients with atrial fibrillation and prior intracranial hemorrhage. In this study, we did not find differences regarding safety and efficacy in early closure compared with late closure. Further studies are needed to support early closure to reduce the complications associated with oral anticoagulation withdrawal. El uso de anticoagulantes orales conlleva un aumento del riesgo de hemorragias intracraneales en pacientes con fibrilación auricular y CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥ 2. El cierre percutáneo de orejuela izquierda sería una alternativa a la anticoagulación oral, aunque la evidencia en relación a los pacientes con sangrados cerebrales es todavía escasa y el momento idóneo de realizar el mismo, controvertido. Además de todo ello, hasta el momento el seguimiento a largo plazo descrito en este perfil de pacientes no ha sido analizado. Evaluar la eficacia y seguridad del cierre percutáneo de orejuela izquierda en pacientes con fibrilación auricular y hemorragia intracranial y determinar el momento adecuado para realizar el procedimiento. Registro multicéntrico que incluyó 403 pacientes con fibrilación auricular y cierre percutáneo de orejuela izquierda. En 128 (31,8%) de ellos, la indicación fue hemorragia intracraneal. Estos pacientes fueron divididos en dos grupos: cierre precoz (n = 31; 24,2%), en los cuales el cierre se realizó en los primeros 90 días tras el sangrado cerebral, y cierre tardío (n = 97; 75,8%), tras más de 90 días. El éxito global del procedimiento fue del 97% (124/128). Complicaciones relacionadas con la intervención ocurrieron en 4 pacientes (3.15%): 2 taponamientos cardiacos, 1 embolización de dispositivo y 1 accidente isquémico transitorio. Se evidenció una reducción significativa en cuanto a los eventos isquémicos y sangrados respecto a los estimados por las escalas de riesgo CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc y HASBLED (93.9% y 89.9% respectivamente) tras una media de seguimiento de 73.9 ± 34.1 meses. No existían diferencias significativas en las características basales de ambos grupos (precoz y tardío) y tampoco se objetivaron en cuanto a las complicaciones o éxito del procedimiento. Además, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en mortalidad, eventos isquémicos o sangrados entre grupos. El cierre percutáneo de orejuela izquierda es una alternativa segura y eficaz para reducer el riesgo isquémico y de sangrado en pacientes con fibrilación auricular y antecedente de hemorragia intracranial. En este estudio no se encontraron diferencias en cuanto a la eficacia o seguridad entre los grupos de cierre precoz o tardío. Nuevas investigaciones serán necesarias para soportar la teoría de que el cierre precoz reducirá las complicaciones asociadas a la anticoagulación en este perfil de pacientes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calle et al. (2025) conducted an observational in non-valvular atrial fibrillation and prior intracranial hemorrhage (n=128). Early left atrial appendage occlusion (<90 days) vs. Late left atrial appendage occlusion (>90 days) was evaluated on mortality, ischemic events, or hemorrhage. Left atrial appendage occlusion in AF patients with prior intracranial hemorrhage reduced ischemic and bleeding rates by 93.9% and 89.9% vs expected, with similar outcomes for early vs late closure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: