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

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.10.023Get rights and content
Under an Elsevier user license
open archive

Abstract

Background

The PRAGUE-17 (Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation) trial demonstrated that left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) was noninferior to nonwarfarin direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for preventing major neurological, cardiovascular, or bleeding events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who were at high risk.

Objectives

This study sought to assess the prespecified long-term (4-year) outcomes in PRAGUE-17.

Methods

PRAGUE-17 was a randomized noninferiority trial comparing percutaneous LAAC (Watchman or Amulet) with DOACs (95% apixaban) in patients with nonvalvular AF and with a history of cardioembolism, clinically-relevant bleeding, or both CHA2DS2-VASc ≥3 and HASBLED ≥2. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardioembolic events (stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism), cardiovascular death, clinically relevant bleeding, or procedure-/device-related complications (LAAC group only). The primary analysis was modified intention-to-treat.

Results

This study randomized 402 patients with AF (201 per group, age 73.3 ± 7.0 years, 65.7% male, CHA2DS2-VASc 4.7 ±1.5, HASBLED 3.1 ± 0.9). After 3.5 years median follow-up (1,354 patient-years), LAAC was noninferior to DOACs for the primary endpoint by modified intention-to-treat (subdistribution HR [sHR]: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.56-1.18; P = 0.27; P for noninferiority = 0.006). For the components of the composite endpoint, the corresponding sHRs were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.39-1.20; P = 0.19) for cardiovascular death, 1.14 (95% CI: 0.56-2.30; P = 0.72) for all-stroke/transient ischemic attack, 0.75 (95% CI: 0.44-1.27; P = 0.28) for clinically relevant bleeding, and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.31-0.97; P = 0.039) for nonprocedural clinically relevant bleeding. The primary endpoint outcomes were similar in the per-protocol (sHR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.54-1.18; P = 0.25) and on-treatment (sHR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.56-1.20; P = 0.30) analyses.

Conclusions

In long-term follow-up of PRAGUE-17, LAAC remains noninferior to DOACs for preventing major cardiovascular, neurological, or bleeding events. Furthermore, nonprocedural bleeding was significantly reduced with LAAC. (PRAGUE-17 [Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation]; NCT02426944)

Key Words

atrial fibrillation
cardioembolism
dire oral anticoagulant
left atrial appendage closure
oral anticoagulation

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AF
atrial fibrillation
CV
cardiovascular
DAPT
dual antiplatelet treatment
DOAC
direct oral anticoagulant
IQR
interquartile range
ITT
intention-to-treat
LA
left atrial
LAA
left atrial appendage
LAAC
left atrial appendage closure
mITT
modified intention-to-treat
OAC
oral anticoagulant
SE
systemic embolism
sHR
subdistribution HR
TEE
transesophageal echocardiography
TIA
transient ischemic attack

Cited by (0)

Listen to this manuscript's audio summary by Editor-in-Chief Dr Valentin Fuster on JACC.org.

Faisal Merchant, MD, served as Guest Associate Editor for this paper. Javed Butler, MD, MPH, MBA, served as Guest Editor-in-Chief for this paper.

The authors attest they are in compliance with human studies committees and animal welfare regulations of the authors’ institutions and Food and Drug Administration guidelines, including patient consent where appropriate. For more information, visit the Author Center.

Drs Widimsky and Reddy are joint senior authors.