Time Trends of Etiology, Treatment, and Long-Term Outcomes Among Patients with Left Ventricular Thrombus.

BACKGROUND

Recommendations for drug treatment of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) are based on the ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guidelines; however, the etiology of LVT has changed. Due to the lack of evidence regarding LVT treatment in the heart failure population, current heart failure guidelines do not cover LVT treatment. We sought to review the etiology of LVT and changes in antithrombotic therapy over the previous 12 years and explore the impact of anticoagulation treatment from a single center's experience.

METHODS

From January 2009 to June 2021, we studied 1675 patients with a discharge diagnosis of LVT at a single center to investigate the clinical characteristics, incidence of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, ischemic stroke, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), systemic embolism (SE), and major bleeding events. Patients were divided into an anticoagulant group and a non-anticoagulant group according to whether they received oral anticoagulant therapy at discharge.

RESULTS

The study included 909 patients (anticoagulation, 510; no anticoagulation, 399). While overall antiplatelet therapy dramatically decreased, more patients with LVT received oral anticoagulation in 2021 (74.0%) than in 2009 (29.6%). In addition, more than half of the patients had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) each year. The all-cause mortality was 17.3% during 3.8 years of follow-up. The incidences of cardiovascular death, stroke, MACCE, SE, and major bleeding were 16.0%, 3.3%, 19.8%, 5.1%, and 1.7%, respectively. The anticoagulation group had a significantly higher proportion of dilated cardiomyopathy than the non-anticoagulation group (24.7% vs. 5.5%, 0.001), and a lower LVEF (34.0 vs. 41.0, 0.001). The anticoagulation group also had a higher probability of adverse events on long-term follow-up ( 0.05). A multivariable competing risk regression model found no significant difference in all six endpoints between the groups (all 0.05). Similar results were found by matched and weighted data analysis. Diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio (HR), 1.42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-1.93; = 0.027), renal insufficiency (HR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.60-3.50; 0.001), history of previous stroke (HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.13-2.29; = 0.009), and HFrEF (HR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.78-3.64; 0.001) were predictors of increased risk of MACCE.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart failure, rather than acute myocardial infarction, is currently the primary cause of LVT. A trend towards better prognosis in the no anticoagulation group was noted. Multivariable, matching and weighting analysis showed no improvement in prognosis with anticoagulant therapy. Our study does not negate the efficacy of anticoagulation but suggests the need to strengthen the management of anticoagulation in order to achieve better efficacy.