Key result
Study protocol compares thoracoscopic LAA clipping to NOACs for stroke prevention in non-valvular AF.
Why the study?
Although transthoracic left atrial appendage closure has a high successful closure rate, direct comparative literature reports against oral anticoagulation are lacking.
Does thoracoscopic left atrial appendage clipping reduce stroke and systemic embolism compared to NOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding?
Observational (n=186)
No
Does thoracoscopic left atrial appendage clipping reduce stroke and systemic embolism compared to NOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding?
This study protocol outlines a non-randomised trial comparing thoracoscopic left atrial appendage clipping to NOACs for stroke prevention in NVAF patients at high risk for both stroke and bleeding.
Should not yet change practice for stroke prevention in high-risk NVAF; leaves open the role of thoracoscopic LAA clipping versus NOACs.
INTRODUCTION: -VASc scores ≥2 and women ≥3. However, in patients with a high risk of stroke and a high risk of bleeding (HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly (> 65 years), Drugs/alcohol concomitantly) score≥3), OAC had a higher risk of bleeding. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is non-inferior to OAC as a means of preventing stroke in several studies. As a minimally invasive intervention to prevent stroke, transthoracic LAAC (TS-LAAC) has a high successful closure rate, but there is a lack of literature reports directly comparing it with OAC. Our research compares TS-LAAC with novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and provides an appropriate programme for stroke prevention in a specific population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a non-randomised controlled trial study protocol, and we will conduct this study from April 2022 to April 2025. The study included 186 patients with confirmed NVAF, 93 of whom completed thoracoscopic LAAC, and the control group treated with NOACs. The primary outcome was the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism, as well as the composite endpoint events (stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, bleeding, cardiovascular death, etc). Secondary outcomes were ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, any bleeding events, death from cardiovascular causes, death from all causes, residual root rate in the surgery group, device-related thrombosis in the surgery group, changes in blood pressure, cardiac chamber size changes, etc. Each subject completed at least 1 year of follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, China (approval number: KY2022-013-02). The results from this study will be disseminated through manuscript publications and national/international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2200058109.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ye et al. (2022) conducted an observational in non-valvular atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding (n=186). Thoracoscopic left atrial appendage clipping (TS-LAAC) vs. Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) was evaluated on Incidence of stroke and systemic embolism, and composite endpoint events (stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, bleeding, cardiovascular death, etc). This study protocol outlines a non-randomised trial comparing thoracoscopic left atrial appendage clipping to NOACs for stroke prevention in 186 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: