Left atrial appendage occlusion for atrial fibrillation and bleeding diathesis.
ablation
anticoagulation
bleeding risk
stroke
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
revised:
04
09
2023
received:
06
06
2023
accepted:
10
10
2023
medline:
11
12
2023
pubmed:
14
11
2023
entrez:
14
11
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and likelihood of bleeding can undergo left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as an alternative method of stroke prophylaxis. Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs are used postprocedure to offset the risk of device-related thrombus, evidence for this practice is limited. To investigate optimal postimplant antithrombotic strategy in high bleeding-risk patients. Patients with AF and high-risk for both stroke and bleeding undergoing LAAO were advised their perioperative drug therapy by a multidisciplinary physician panel. Those deemed to be at higher risk of bleeding from anti-thrombotic drugs were assigned to minimal treatment with no antithrombotics or Aspirin-alone. The remaining patients received standard care (STG) with a 12 week course of dual-antiplatelets or anticoagulation postimplant. We compared mortality, device-related thrombus, ischemic stroke, and bleeding events during the 90 days postimplant and long-term. Event-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with logrank testing for statistical significance. Seventy-five patients underwent LAAO of whom 63 patients (84%) had a prior serious bleeding event. The 42 patients on minimal treatment were older (74.3 ± 7.7 vs. 71.2 ± 7.2) with higher HASBLED score (3.6 ± 0.9 vs. 3.3 ± 1.2) than the 33 patients having standard care. There were no device-related thrombi or strokes in either group at 90 days postprocedure; STG had more bleeding events (5/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.01) with associated deaths (3/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.05). During long-term follow-up (median 2.2 years), all patients transitioned onto no antithrombotic drugs (43 patients [61%]) or a single-antiplatelet (29 patients [39%]). There was no evidence of early minimal treatment adversely affecting long-term outcomes. Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs may not be needed after LAAO implant in patients with high bleeding risk and could be harmful. Larger, prospective studies would be warranted to test these findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and likelihood of bleeding can undergo left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as an alternative method of stroke prophylaxis. Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs are used postprocedure to offset the risk of device-related thrombus, evidence for this practice is limited.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To investigate optimal postimplant antithrombotic strategy in high bleeding-risk patients.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients with AF and high-risk for both stroke and bleeding undergoing LAAO were advised their perioperative drug therapy by a multidisciplinary physician panel. Those deemed to be at higher risk of bleeding from anti-thrombotic drugs were assigned to minimal treatment with no antithrombotics or Aspirin-alone. The remaining patients received standard care (STG) with a 12 week course of dual-antiplatelets or anticoagulation postimplant. We compared mortality, device-related thrombus, ischemic stroke, and bleeding events during the 90 days postimplant and long-term. Event-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with logrank testing for statistical significance.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Seventy-five patients underwent LAAO of whom 63 patients (84%) had a prior serious bleeding event. The 42 patients on minimal treatment were older (74.3 ± 7.7 vs. 71.2 ± 7.2) with higher HASBLED score (3.6 ± 0.9 vs. 3.3 ± 1.2) than the 33 patients having standard care. There were no device-related thrombi or strokes in either group at 90 days postprocedure; STG had more bleeding events (5/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.01) with associated deaths (3/33 vs. 0/42, p = 0.05). During long-term follow-up (median 2.2 years), all patients transitioned onto no antithrombotic drugs (43 patients [61%]) or a single-antiplatelet (29 patients [39%]). There was no evidence of early minimal treatment adversely affecting long-term outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Short-term anti-thrombotic drugs may not be needed after LAAO implant in patients with high bleeding risk and could be harmful. Larger, prospective studies would be warranted to test these findings.
Substances chimiques
Anticoagulants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2552-2562Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Glikson M, Wolff R, Hindricks G, et al. EHRA/EAPCI expert consensus statement on catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion-an update. EP Europace. 2020;22(2):184. doi:10.1093/europace/euz258
Holmes DR, Kar S, Price MJ, et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of the watchman left atrial appendage closure device in patients with atrial fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy. JACC. 2014;64(1):1-12. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.029
Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. 5-year outcomes after left atrial appendage closure. JACC. 2017;70(24):2964-2975. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.021
Reddy VY, Möbius-Winkler S, Miller MA, et al. Left atrial appendage closure with the watchman device in patients with a contraindication for oral anticoagulation,”. JACC. 2013;61(25):2551-2556. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.03.035
Abbott©, AmplatzerTM. AmuletTM left atrial appendage occluder: instructions for use manual, Page 6. ISBN 100105566.
Saw J, Holmes DR, Cavalcante JL, et al. SCAI/HRS expert consensus statement on transcatheter left atrial appendage closure. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiog Interve. 2023;2(3):100577. doi:10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100577
Osmancik P, Herman D, Neuzil P, et al. “Left atrial appendage closure versus direct oral anticoagulants in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. JACC. 2020;75(25):3122-3135. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2020.04.067
Duthoit G, Silvain J, Marijon E, et al. Reduced rivaroxaban dose versus dual antiplatelet therapy after left atrial appendage closure: ADRIFT a randomized pilot study. Circulation. Cardiovasc Interve. 2020;13(7):008481. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008481
Connolly S, Pogue R, Hart R, et al. Clopidogrel plus aspirin versus oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation in the atrial fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for prevention of vascular events (ACTIVE W): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;367(9526):1903-1912. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68845-4
Briosa e Gala A, Pope MTB, Monteiro C, et al. Long-term outcomes and periprocedural safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in a United Kingdom tertiary center: an 11-year experience. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18(10):1724-1732. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.06.1170
Bertrand PB, Habran M, Kenis K, et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: single center experience with the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug. Acta Cardiol. 2019;74(1):74-81. doi:10.1080/00015385.2018.1455946
Kleinecke C, Park JW, Gödde M, Zintl K, Schnupp S, Brachmann J. Twelve-month follow-up of left atrial appendage occlusion with Amplatzer Amulet. Cardiol J. 2017;24(2):131-138. doi:10.5603/CJ.a2017.0017
Patti G, Sticchi A, Verolino G, et al. Safety and efficacy of single versus dual antiplatelet therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion. Am J Cardiol. 2020;134:83-90. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.08.013
Vignali L, Gurgoglione FL, Barocelli F, et al. Looking for optimal antithrombotic strategy after transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion: a real-world comparison of different antiplatelet regimens. Int J Cardiol. 2022;371:92-99. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.09.066
Korsholm K, Nielsen KM, Jensen JM, Jensen HK, Andersen G, Nielsen-Kudsk JE. Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation and a high bleeding risk using aspirin alone for post-implant antithrombotic therapy. EuroIntervention: J EuroPCR in Collabor Working Group Interve Cardiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2017;12:2075-2082. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-16-00726
Hildick-Smith D, Landmesser U, Camm AJ, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion with the AmplatzerTM AmuletTM device: full results of the prospective global observational study. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(28):2894-2901. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa169
Aminian A, Schmidt B, Mazzone P, et al. Incidence, characterization, and clinical impact of device-related thrombus following left atrial appendage occlusion in the prospective global AMPLATZER Amulet Observational Study. JACC: Cardiovasc Interve. 2019;12(11):1003-1014.
Cepas-Guillen PL, Flores-Umanzor E, Regueiro A, et al. Low dose of direct oral anticoagulants after left atrial appendage occlusion. J Cardiovasc Develop Dis. 2021;8(11):142. doi:10.3390/jcdd8110142
dellaRocca DG, Magnocavallo M, Di Biase L, et al. Half-dose direct oral anticoagulation versus standard antithrombotic therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion. JACC: Cardiovasc Interve. 2021;14(21):2353-2364. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2021.07.031
Osman M, Busu T, Osman K, et al. Short-term antiplatelet versus anticoagulant therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC. Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(5):494-506. doi:10.1016/j.jacep.2019.11.009
Pisters R, Lane DA, Nieuwlaat R, de Vos CB, Crijns HJGM, Lip GYH. A novel user-friendly score (HAS-BLED) to assess 1-year risk of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation. Chest. 2010;138(5):1093-1100. doi:10.1378/chest.10-0134
O'Brien EC, Simon DN, Thomas LE, et al. The ORBIT bleeding score: a simple bedside score to assess bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J [Preprint]. 2015;36(46):3258-3264. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv476
Steinberg BA, Shrader P, Thomas L, et al. Off-label dosing of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and adverse outcomes. JACC. 2016;68(24):2597-2604. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.09.966
Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Edoxaban versus Warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(22):2093-2104. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1310907
Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(12):1139-1151.
Okumura K, Akao M, Yoshida T, et al. Low-dose edoxaban in very elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(18):1735-1745. doi:10.1056/nejmoa2012883