A real-world multicenter study on left atrial appendage occlusion: The Italian multi-device experience

Abstract

BackgroundTranscatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at high risk of thromboembolism, who cannot tolerate long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). Questions persist regarding effectiveness and safety of this treatment and the optimal post-interventional antithrombotic regimen after LAAO. MethodsWe retrospectively gathered data from 428 patients who underwent percutaneous LAAO in 6 Italian high-volume centres, aimed at describing the real-world utilization, safety, and effectiveness of LAAO procedures, also assessing the clinical outcomes associated with different antithrombotic strategies. ResultsAmong the entire population, 20 (4.7 %) patients experienced a combination of pericardial effusion and periprocedural major bleeding: 8 (1.9 %) pericardial effusion, 1 (0.3 %) fatal bleeding, and 3 (0.7 %) non-fatal procedural major bleeding. Patients were discharged with different antithrombotic regimens: dual (DAPT) (27 %) or single (SAPT) (26 %) antiplatelet therapy, OAC (27 %), other antithrombotic regimens (14 %). Very few patients were not prescribed with antithrombotic drugs (6 %). At a medium 523 ± 58 days follow-up, 14 patients (3.3 %) experienced all-cause death, 6 patients (1.4 %) cardiovascular death, 3 patients (0.7 %) major bleeding, 10 patients (2.6 %) clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and 3 patients (0.7 %) ischemic stroke. At survival analysis, with DAPT as the reference group, OAC therapy was associated with better outcomes. ConclusionsOur findings confirm that LAAO is a safe procedure. Different individualized post-discharge antithrombotic regimens are now adopted, likely driven by the perceived thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk. The incidence of both ischemic and bleeding events tends to be low.