Why the study?
To compare the risk of bleeding and early device-related thrombosis associated with low-dose NOAC versus DAPT in post-left atrial appendage closure cases.
Does low-dose NOAC reduce early device-related thrombosis and bleeding compared to DAPT in patients post-left atrial appendage closure?
Does low-dose NOAC reduce early device-related thrombosis and bleeding compared to DAPT in patients post-left atrial appendage closure?
Low-dose NOACs are associated with a significantly lower risk of early device-related thrombosis and bleeding compared to DAPT following left atrial appendage closure.
DAPT was associated with higher early DRT risk; hypothesis-generating for LD-NOAC regimens, requiring randomized confirmation before practice change.
Objective We compared the risk of bleeding and early device-related thrombosis (DRT) events associated with low dose of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (LD-NOAC) vs dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in post-left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) cases. Methods Based on the post-LAAC thromboprophylaxis, consecutive patients were categorized into DAPT group: aspirin+ clopidogrel for 6 months followed by aspirin 81 mg/day (n=501) or LD-NOAC group: low-dose of the non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (LD-NOAC) (n=917). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed at 45 days and 3, 6 and 12-month post-procedure to exclude DRT. DRT were considered ‘early’ if they were detected within six months post-procedure. Patients on DAPT were propensity-matched with those on LD-NOAC with a 1:1.5 ratio, to control for confounding due to imbalance of covariates between groups. Results Real-world patients: DRT were detected in 21 (1.48%) patients; 15 (2.99%) and 6 (0.65%) patients in the DAPT and LD-NOAC cohort respectively (p=0.0005) All DRTs in the DAPT-group were detected by 3 months whereas it was detected at 6-mo TEE in 3 of the 6 (50%) patients of the LD-NOAC group Higher number of bleeding events were reported in the DAPT group (81 (16.2%) vs 79 (8.6%), p=0.001). Propensity-matched population: The matched population included 501 in the DAPT group and 751 patients in the LD-NOAC group (1: 1.5). DRT were detected in 13 (2.6%) vs 5 (0.7%) patients from the DAPT and LD-NOAC group respectively (p=0.005). In the multivariable model, DAPT (OR:3.921, 95% CI: 1.399-11.081, p=0.006) was an independent predictor of DRT. Conclusion DRT was detected in significantly higher number of real-world as well as matched patients that remained on DAPT vs LD-NOAC. DAPT was associated with >3 times higher risk of early DRT compared to LD-NOAC in propensity-matched populations Future randomized trials are needed to validate the current study findings
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohanty et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: