Why the study?
Randomized trials demonstrating the benefit of OAC in hemodialysis patients with AF are lacking, and observational studies suggest increased bleeding risks, prompting evaluation of left atrial appendage closure.
What are the advantages and limitations of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) compared to oral anticoagulants for thromboembolic prophylaxis in kidney failure patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing hemodialysis?
What are the advantages and limitations of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) compared to oral anticoagulants for thromboembolic prophylaxis in kidney failure patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing hemodialysis?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This position paper outlines the potential role of LAAC as an alternative to OAC for thromboembolic prophylaxis in hemodialysis patients with AF, highlighting the need for individualized decision-making given the lack of RCT data.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent in patients with kidney failure (KF) who are undergoing hemodialysis (HD). All patients with AF and a thromboembolic risk score (CHA2DS2-VA) of two or more should be prescribed oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC), according to cardiology guidelines. However, there are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating that OAC protects against thromboembolic events in HD patients. Furthermore, evidence from observational studies is insufficient to demonstrate the benefits of OAC for preventing thromboembolism in HD patients with AF. Instead, it suggests that OAC is associated with an increased risk of bleeding in these patients. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been proposed as a means of preventing thromboembolic events in patients with AF. RCTs conducted in populations with preserved kidney function have demonstrated that the procedure is not inferior to OAC in terms of efficacy, and is associated with greater safety. Although no RCTs have tested the safety and efficacy of LAAC in KF patients undergoing HD, some observational studies suggest that LAAC has a similar efficacy profile in patients with and without KF. However, a higher incidence of peri-procedural complications has been reported. Observational studies comparing the efficacy and safety of LAAC with OAC in KF patients have shown a similar or reduced incidence of thromboembolism and bleeding in patients undergoing the procedure. The purpose of this Position Paper is to provide comprehensive, evidence-based information on the advantages and limitations of LAAC in KF patients with AF undergoing HD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Genovesi et al. (2026) conducted a review in Kidney failure with atrial fibrillation undergoing hemodialysis. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) vs. Oral anticoagulants (OAC) was evaluated. Observational studies suggest left atrial appendage closure has a similar or reduced incidence of thromboembolism and bleeding compared to oral anticoagulants in hemodialysis patients with atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: