Abstract

Background and purpose: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an option for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients. Randomized studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of LAAC but included patients with an average risk of stroke and bleeding complications. The current study aimed to assess the extended utility of CHA2DS2VASc (congestive heart failure; hypertension; age ≥75 years [doubled]; type 2 diabetes; previous stroke, transient ischemic attack, or thromboembolism [doubled]; vascular disease; age 65 to 75 years; and sex category) and HAS-BLED (hypertension; abnormal renal/liver function; stroke; bleeding history or predisposition; labile INR, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly) scores for qualification and prognosis after LAAC. Methods: The study population comprised 270 patients aged 72.8 ± 8.78 years. The occluders used were the Amplatzer Amulet (N = 205), Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (N = 53), and Watchman device (N = 12). The prognosis after LAAC was analyzed for different cohorts of patients distinguished based on different CHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED scores. The mean duration of follow-up was 21.6 ± 10.3 months. Results: The observed rates of ischemic stroke and bleeding were much lower than that expected (2.2% vs. 5.6%, and 0.76% vs. 6.05%, respectively). The mortality rate did not differ concerning the CHA2DS2CVASc score. It was significantly lower (8.3%) for HAS-BLED < 3, and it raised to 17.9% for HAS-BLED = 3 and to 25.9% for HAS-BLED > 3. Significant differences (p = 0.003) occurred for Kaplan–Meier curves for extreme HAS-BLED subgroups. A composite endpoint was most often found in high/very high risk of bleeding patients. Conclusions: HAS-BLED, but not CHA2DS2CVASc score, may be a useful tool to predict the prognosis of patients after LAAC. Qualification for LAAC based on the risk of stroke should not differ from qualification for anticoagulation. Despite the worse prognosis of patients with the highest bleeding risk, this group is likely to experience the greatest benefit from reducing the bleeding risk from LAAC.

Highlights

  • Effective prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation remains one of the main problems in modern cardiology

  • The number of patients with atrial fibrillation and the number of patients requiring stroke prevention is expected to increase in the coming decades

  • PROTECT-AF and the PREVAIL study, conducted in such a population, showed that Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a non-inferior method of stroke prophylaxis compared to treatment with warfarin

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Effective prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation remains one of the main problems in modern cardiology. The 2020 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend using stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation in the high-risk group. They suggest considering that approach if the risk of stroke is estimated to be moderate [2]. According to ESC recommendations, LAAC can be considered in patients with long-term contraindications for anticoagulant treatment [2]. Randomized studies that determined the effectiveness and safety of LAAC treatments compared to VKAs involved patients with an average risk of stroke and hemorrhagic complications who could receive anticoagulant treatment [6,7]. We compared the procedural safety and long-term effectiveness of LAAC in different patient cohorts based on stroke and bleeding risk

Methods
Discussion
Conclusions
Findings
Study Limitation
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