Influence of Prior Major Bleeding on the Safety and Effectiveness of Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Single-Center Study

Abstract Purpose: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may present an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, evidence regarding benefit of LAAC in patients with prior major bleeding is limited. We evaluate whether a previous bleeding factor influences the safety and effectiveness of LAAC. Methods: A total of 377 consecutive patients scheduled for LAAC were categorized into a bleeding group (n=137) and non-bleeding group (n=240). The implantation success and prevalence of severe peri-procedural complications, and efficacy/ safety endpoints during follow-up were investigated. Results: The bleeding group had more patients ≥75 years old (P=0.044), higher CHA2DS2-VASc (P=0.029) and HAS-BLED scores (P=0.001) than the non-bleeding group. Implantation success and severe peri-procedural complications were similar. During an average 2 years’ follow-up, major bleeding events (P=0.917), all-cause death (P=0.313), co-primary efficacy events (P=0.063), and the cumulative survival ratio (P=0.828) were comparable. However, the incidence of thromboembolism was lower in the bleeding group (P=0.031). The observed thromboembolism rate was reduced by 86.1% (P<0.005) and 43.9% (P<0.05) and the observed bleeding rate was decreased by 39.0% (P<0.05) and 34.8% (P<0.05) in the bleeding and non-bleeding groups, respectively. The extent of relative risk reduction in thromboembolism was significantly higher in the bleeding group (86.1% vs. 43.9%, P<0.01). Conclusion: LAAC may provide a safe and effective alternative to long-term antithrombotic therapy in NVAF patients with or without prior bleeding. The efficacy of LAAC in reducing thromboembolism instead of major bleeding seems to be higher in patients with versus without prior bleeding.