Lower rate of major bleeding in very high risk patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion: A propensity score-matched comparison with direct oral anticoagulation.

BACKGROUND:Long-term oral anticoagulation is the mainstay therapy for thromboembolic (TE) prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) could be a safe alternative to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with a very high TE risk profile. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of LAAO vs DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation at very high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category] score ≥ 5). METHODS:Data from patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 5 were extracted from a prospective multicenter database. To attenuate the imbalance in covariates between groups, propensity score matching was used (covariates: CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED [hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol] scores), which resulted in a matched population of 277 patients per group. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, TE events, and clinically relevant bleeding during follow-up. RESULTS:Of 2381 patients, 554 very high risk patients were included in the study (mean age 79 ± 7 years; CHA2DS2-VASc score 5.8 ± 0.9; HAS-BLED score 3.0 ± 0.9). The mean follow-up duration was 25 ± 11 months. A higher incidence of the composite end point was documented with DOACs compared with LAAO (14.9 events per 100 patient-years in the DOAC group vs 9.4 events per 100 patient-years in the LAAO group; P = .03). The annualized clinically relevant bleeding risk was higher with DOACs (6.3% vs 3.2%; P = .04), while the risk of TE events was not different between groups (4.1% vs 3.2%; P = .63). CONCLUSION:In high-risk patients, LAAO had a similar stroke prevention efficacy but a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding when compared with DOACs. The clinical benefit of LAAO became significant after 18 months of follow-up.