Abstract

Introduction: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is non-inferior to warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in thromboembolic prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF). However, these antithrombotic strategies in patients with and without contraindications to anticoagulants were not assessed separately before. Hypothesis: LAAO is superior to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in net clinical benefit in patients without contraindications for its usage, and superior to no thromboembolic prophylaxis in patients with contraindications for OAC. Methods: A prospective registry included 379 patients with nonvalvular AF and high risk of thromboembolic events. Patients were assigned into cohorts with and without contraindications to continuous therapy with OAC. In the first cohort patients with LAA occlusion (n=45), on DOAC (n=99) and on warfarin (n=100) were compared. In the second cohort patients with LAAO (n=75) were compared with those who received no antithrombotic prophylaxis (n = 60). The primary composite endpoint was net clinical benefit (all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism and major bleeding) in 3 years. Results: Using log-rank analysis of Kaplan-Meier curves in the cohort of patients without contraindications to OAC LAAO was superior to warfarin, reaching statistical significance (p=0.048), with a trend towards superiority over DOAC (p=0.061) . In the cohort of patients with contraindications to continuous OAC use, LAAO, in terms of both overall efficacy and safety, was significantly superior to no prophylaxis of thromboembolic events (p=0.003). (Figure 1). Conclusions: LAA occlusion demonstrated superiority to warfarin and no prophylaxis of thromboembolic events in terms of net clinical benefit. There was a trend to superiority of LAAO over DOAC in patients with contraindications to OAC.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call