ISSN: 1885-5857 Impact factor 2023 7.2
Corrected proofs Journal pre-proofs

Original article
Impact of intensive versus nonintensive antithrombotic treatment on device-related thrombus after left atrial appendage closure

Impacto del tratamiento antitrombótico intensivo frente al no intensivo en la trombosis del dispositivo tras cierre de la orejuela izquierda

Philippe GarotaPedro Cepas-GuillénbcEduardo Flores-UmanzorbNina LeducdVilhemas BajorasefgNils PerrinhAngela McInerneyiAna LafondjJulio Farjat-PasoscXavi MillánkSandra ZendjebilaReda IbrahimhPablo SalinasiOle de BackereIgnacio Cruz-GonzálezjDabit ArzamendikLaura SanchisbLuis Nombela-FrancoiGilles ÓHaracAdel AminiandJens Erik Nielsen-KudsklJosep Rodés-CabaubcXavier Freixab

Options

Imagen extra
10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.006
Abstract
Introduction and objectives

The optimal antithrombotic therapy (AT) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is debated. We assessed the impact of intensive vs nonintensive AT on the incidence of device-related thrombus (DRT) based on whether the device implantation was classified as optimal or suboptimal.

Methods

This study included patients who underwent successful LAAC in 9 centers. Patients were classified according to the quality of device implantation: optimal (proximal implant without ≥3mm peridevice leak) or suboptimal (distal implant and/or ≥3mm peridevice leak). Postimplant AT was classified as either intensive (dual antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulants, or a combination of both) or nonintensive (no AT or a single antiplatelet therapy). The primary endpoint was the incidence of DRT between the 6th and 12th weeks postprocedure.

Results

A total of 1225 patients underwent LAAC, with 757 (61.8%) achieving optimal device implantation and 468 (38.2%) classified as suboptimal. After a median follow-up of 20 months, the incidence of DRT in the optimal implant group was 2.6% with intensive AT and 3.7% with nonintensive AT (P=.38). In the suboptimal implant group, the incidence of DRT increased to 11.2% with intensive AT and 15.5% with nonintensive AT (P=.19). On multivariate analysis, suboptimal implantation (HR, 4.51; 95%CI, 2.70-7.54, P<.001) but not intensive AT (HR, 0,66; 95%CI, 0.40-1.07, P=.09) emerged as an independent predictor of DRT.

Conclusions

The incidence of DRT after LAAC was higher in patients with suboptimal device implantation. In patients with optimal implantation, the incidence of DRT was low and similar between nonintensive and intensive AT strategies. Large, randomized trials are warranted to confirm these results.

Keywords

Left atrial appendage closure
Atrial fibrillation
Antiplatelet agents
Anticoagulants
Device-related thrombosis
Stroke

Identify yourself

Not yet a subscriber to the journal?

Purchase access to the article

By purchasing the article, the PDF of the same can be downloaded

Price: 19,34 €

Phone for incidents

Monday to Friday from 9am to 6pm (GMT+1) except for the months of July and August, which will be from 9am to 3pm

Calls from Spain 932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain +34 932 415 960
Copyright © 2024. Sociedad Española de Cardiología
Are you a healthcare professional authorized to prescribe or dispense medications?