Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Direct Anticoagulants at Long Term

The PRAGUE-17 has shown that left atrial appendage closure is not inferior to direct anticoagulants at long term to prevent major cardiovascular, neurological, or bleeding events. Moreover, procedures not related to prosthesis implantation saw significant reduction.

Cierre de orejuela vs anticoagulantes directos a largo plazo

The PRAGUE-17 was a randomized non-inferiority study comparing left atrial appendage closure (Watchman or Amulet) with direct anticoagulants (95% received apixaban) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in addition to a history of cardio-embolism, clinically relevant bleeding or both (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3). 

Primary end point was a combination of cardioembolic events (stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic thromboembolism), cardiovascular death, clinically relevant bleeding, or procedure related complications (only for atrial appendage closure).

It included 201 patients in each group (mean age 73.3 ± 7.0). After 3.5 year mean follow-up, atrial appendage closure resulted non inferior to direct anticoagulants for primary end point. 


Read also: PRAGUE-17: Appendage Closure vs. Direct Anticoagulant Agents.


Primary end point resulted similar for both for treatment intention and protocol analysis. 

Conclusion

At long term followup, left atrial appendage closure resulted non inferior to direct anticoagulants in the prevention of cardiovascular, neurological, and bleeding events. After device implantation, bleeding saw significant reduction with these devices.

Original Title: 4-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Nonwarfarin Oral Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation.

Reference: Pavel Osmancik et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 Jan 4;79(1):1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.10.023.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

UNICORN Technique to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During TAVI: Initial Results From a Multicenter Study

Coronary obstruction is an uncommon but potentially catastrophic complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), particularly in valve-in-valve procedures, TAV-in-TAV interventions, or in patients...

Hemodynamic Outcomes of Edge-to-Edge Repair in Degenerative and Functional Mitral Regurgitation

Transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (M-TEER) has become an established therapeutic option for mitral valve disease. Among the available techniques, M-TEER using the MitraClip...

SAPIEN 3 TAVI Durability: Ten-Year Follow-Up in Intermediate-Risk Patients

The durability of transcatheter bioprosthetic valves used in TAVI remains one of the key unanswered questions as indications continue to expand toward patients with...

Inflammation after TAVI: An Emerging Therapeutic Target?

Conduction disturbances and the need for permanent pacemaker implantation remain common complications following TAVI, with an incidence approaching 15%. Although they have traditionally been...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img
Jornadas Guatemala 2026

Recent Articles

UNICORN Technique to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During TAVI: Initial Results From a Multicenter Study

Coronary obstruction is an uncommon but potentially catastrophic complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), particularly in valve-in-valve procedures, TAV-in-TAV interventions, or in patients...

Supera vs. Eluvia at 3 Years in Severely Calcified Femoropopliteal Lesions

Severe calcification remains one of the main predictors of restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization following endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal disease. In this...

Is IVUS Always Necessary for Left Main Coronary Artery PCI?

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the unprotected left main coronary artery is a highly complex procedure because of the large amount of myocardium at...