Department of Cardiology, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Department of Cardiology, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Am J Cardiol. 2023 Oct 1;204:312-319. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.07.059. Epub 2023 Aug 9.
Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) proved to be noninferior to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in nonablated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LAAC with those of OAC therapy in patients after AF ablation. This study included patients who underwent catheter ablation (CA) of AF between January 2016 and December 2020. The cohort was divided into CA + LAAC and CA + OAC, where propensity score matching was used to select controls, and each group contained 682 subjects. The enrolled patients' mean age was 70.34 ± 8.32 years, and 47.3% were female; their CHADS-VASc score was 3.48 ± 1.17. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. After a 3-year mean follow-up, the incidence of thromboembolic events was 1.25 and 1.10 and that of major bleeding events was 0.65 and 1.72 per 100 patient-years in the CA + LAAC, and CA + OAC groups, respectively. The rate of thromboembolisms and major adverse cardiovascular events was similar between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR] 1.162, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.665 to 2.030, p = 0.598, HR 0.711, 95% CI 0.502 to 1.005, p = 0.053); however, that of major bleeding and all-cause death was significantly reduced with LAAC (HR 0.401, 95% CI 0.216 to 0.746, p = 0.004, HR 0.528, 95% CI 0.281 to 0.989, p = 0.046). There was no significant difference in periprocedural complications (p >0.05) and the rate of AF recurrence (OAC vs LAAC: 39.44% vs 40.62%, p = 0.658). LAAC is a reasonable and safer alternative to OAC therapy in high-risk patients after AF ablation.
左心耳封堵(LAAC)在非消融的房颤(AF)患者中被证明不劣于口服抗凝(OAC)。本研究旨在比较 LAAC 与 OAC 治疗在 AF 消融后的患者中的疗效和安全性。本研究纳入了 2016 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月期间接受导管消融(CA)的 AF 患者。该队列分为 CA+LAAC 和 CA+OAC,使用倾向评分匹配选择对照组,每组包含 682 例患者。纳入患者的平均年龄为 70.34±8.32 岁,47.3%为女性;CHA2DS2-VASc 评分为 3.48±1.17。两组间基线特征相似。经过 3 年的平均随访,CA+LAAC 组和 CA+OAC 组每 100 患者年血栓栓塞事件的发生率分别为 1.25%和 1.10%,大出血事件的发生率分别为 0.65%和 1.72%。两组间血栓栓塞和主要不良心血管事件的发生率无差异(风险比 [HR] 1.162,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.665 至 2.030,p=0.598,HR 0.711,95% CI 0.502 至 1.005,p=0.053);然而,LAAC 可显著降低大出血和全因死亡风险(HR 0.401,95% CI 0.216 至 0.746,p=0.004,HR 0.528,95% CI 0.281 至 0.989,p=0.046)。围手术期并发症无显著差异(p>0.05),AF 复发率(OAC 与 LAAC:39.44%与 40.62%,p=0.658)也无显著差异。在 AF 消融后的高危患者中,LAAC 是 OAC 治疗的一种合理且更安全的替代方法。