Nonprocedural bleeding after left atrial appendage closure versus direct oral anticoagulants: A subanalysis of the randomized PRAGUE-17 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies have shown low bleeding rates in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) treated by left atrial appendage closure (LAAC); however, data from randomized studies are lacking. This study compared bleeding events among patients with AF treated by LAAC and nonvitamin K anticoagulants (NOAC). METHODS: The Prague-17 trial was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial that compared LAAC to NOAC in high-risk AF patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of a cardioembolic event, cardiovascular death, and major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) defined according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH). RESULTS: The trial enrolled 402 patients (201 per arm), and the median follow-up was 3.5 (IQR 2.6-4.2) years. Bleeding occurred in 24 patients (29 events) and 32 patients (40 events) in the LAAC and NOAC groups, respectively. Six of the LAAC bleeding events were procedure/device-related. In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, LAAC was associated with similar rates of ISTH major or CRNMB (sHR 0.75, 95% CI 0.44-1.27, p = 0.28), but with a reduction in nonprocedural major or CRNMB (sHR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31-0.97, p = 0.039). This reduction for nonprocedural bleeding with LAAC was mainly driven by a reduced rate of CRNMB (sHR for major bleeding 0.69, 95% CI 0.34-1.39, p = .30; sHR for CRNMB 0.43, 95% CI 0.18-1.03, p = 0.059). History of bleeding was a predictor of bleeding during follow-up. Gastrointestinal bleeding was the most common bleeding site in both groups. CONCLUSION: During the 4-year follow-up, LAAC was associated with less nonprocedural bleeding. The reduction is mainly driven by a decrease in CRNMB.

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

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).

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants in High-Risk Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is noninferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for preventing atrial fibrillation (AF)-related stroke. However, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have an improved safety profile over VKAs, and their effect on cardiovascular and neurological outcomes relative to LAAC is unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare DOACs with LAAC in high-risk patients with AF. METHODS: Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation (PRAGUE-17) was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing LAAC with DOACs. Patients were eligible to be enrolled if they had nonvalvular AF; were indicated for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and had a history of bleeding requiring intervention or hospitalization, a history of a cardioembolic event while taking an OAC, and/or a CHA2DS2-VASc of ≥3 and HAS-BLED of >2. Patients were randomized to receive LAAC or DOAC. The primary composite outcome was stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, cardiovascular death, major or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding, or procedure-/device-related complications. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat. RESULTS: A high-risk patient cohort (CHA2DS2-VASc: 4.7 ± 1.5) was randomized to receive LAAC (n = 201) or DOAC (n = 201). LAAC was successful in 181 of 201 (90.0%) patients. In the DOAC group, apixaban was most frequently used (192 of 201; 95.5%). At a median 19.9 months of follow-up, the annual rates of the primary outcome were 10.99% with LAAC and 13.42% with DOAC (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 to 1.31; p = 0.44; p = 0.004 for noninferiority). There were no differences between groups for the components of the composite endpoint: all-stroke/TIA (sHR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.40 to 2.51), clinically significant bleeding (sHR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.52), and cardiovascular death (sHR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.62). Major LAAC-related complications occurred in 9 (4.5%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high risk for stroke and increased risk of bleeding, LAAC was noninferior to DOAC in preventing major AF-related cardiovascular, neurological, and bleeding events. (Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs. Novel Anticoagulation Agents in Atrial Fibrillation [PRAGUE-17]; NCT02426944).

Five-year outcomes in cardiac surgery patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing concomitant surgical ablation versus no ablation. The long-term follow-up of the PRAGUE-12 Study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term effect of concomitant surgical ablation (SA) on clinical outcomes in an unselected population of patients has not been sufficiently reported in randomized studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes of the SA after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: The PRAGUE-12 study was a prospective, randomized clinical trial assessing cardiac surgery with ablation for AF vs cardiac surgery alone. Patients with AF who were also indicated for cardiac surgery (coronary artery disease [CAD], valve surgery) were randomized to SA or control (no ablation) group. All patients were followed for 5 years. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or severe bleeding. Secondary endpoint was a recurrence of AF. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients were analyzed (SA group = 108 patients, control group = 99 patients). Both groups were similar relative to important clinical characteristics except for CAD, which was more common in the control group. Cumulative incidence curves showed a higher incidence of the primary endpoint in the control group (P = .024, Gray's test). However, after adjusting for all covariables, the difference between groups was not significant (subhazard ratio [SHR] 0.69 [0.47-1.02], P = .068). The incidence of stroke and AF recurrences were significantly reduced in the SA group, and remained significant even after adjustment for all covariables, including CAD (stroke: SHR 0.32 [0.12-0.84], P = .02, AF recurrences: SHR 0.44 [0.31-0.62], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant SA of AF is associated with a greater likelihood of maintaining sinus rhythm and a decreased risk of stroke.

Interventional left atrial appendage closure vs novel anticoagulation agents in patients with atrial fibrillation indicated for long-term anticoagulation (PRAGUE-17 study).

Atrial fibrillation (AF), with a prevalence of 1% to 2%, is the most common cardiac arrhythmia. Without antithrombotic treatment, the annual risk of a cardioembolic event is 5% to 6%. The source of a cardioembolic event is a thrombus, which is usually formed in the left atrial appendage (LAA). Prevention of cardioembolic events involves treatment with anticoagulant drugs: either vitamin K antagonists or, recently, novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC). The other (nonpharmacologic) option for the prevention of a cardioembolic event involves interventional occlusion of the LAA. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether percutaneous LAA occlusion is noninferior to treatment with NOAC in AF patients indicated for long-term systemic anticoagulation. STUDY DESIGN: The trial will be a prospective, multicenter, randomized noninferiority trial comparing 2 treatment strategies in moderate to high-risk AF patients (ie, patients with history of significant bleeding, or history of cardiovascular event(s), or a with CHA2DS2VASc ≥3 and HAS-BLED score ≥2). Patients will be randomized into a percutaneous LAA occlusion (group A) or a NOAC treatment (group B) in a 1:1 ratio; the randomization was done using Web-based randomization software. A total of 396 study participants (198 patients in each group) will be enrolled in the study. The primary end point will be the occurrence of any of the following events within 24months after randomization: stroke or transient ischemic attack (any type), systemic cardioembolic event, clinically significant bleeding, cardiovascular death, or a significant periprocedural or device-related complications. CONCLUSION: The PRAGUE-17 trial will determine if LAA occlusion is noninferior to treatment with NOAC in moderate- to high-risk AF patients.

[May-Thurner syndrome]. / May-Thurner-szindróma.

May-Thurner syndrome, a pelvic vein congenital anomaly is the consequence of compression of the left common iliacal vein by the overlying right common iliacal artery that results in an increased risk for ileofemoral deep vein thrombosis. Authors present a case of a young female with aberration of the pelvic vein, who had also heterozygous Leiden mutation. After confirmation of the diagnosis of May-Thurner syndrome, plastic surgery of the common iliacal vein was performed and anticoagulant treatment was given.