ISSN 1671-5411 CN 11-5329/R
Volume 18 Issue 11
Nov.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Please cite this article as: Mohrez Y, Gloekler S, Schnupp S, Allakkis W, Liu XX, Fuerholz M, Brachmann J, Windecker S, Achenbach S, Meier B, Kleinecke C. Clinical benefit of left atrial appendage closure in octogenarians. J Geriatr Cardiol 2021; 18(11): 886−896. DOI: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2021.11.003
Citation: Please cite this article as: Mohrez Y, Gloekler S, Schnupp S, Allakkis W, Liu XX, Fuerholz M, Brachmann J, Windecker S, Achenbach S, Meier B, Kleinecke C. Clinical benefit of left atrial appendage closure in octogenarians. J Geriatr Cardiol 2021; 18(11): 886−896. DOI: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2021.11.003

Clinical benefit of left atrial appendage closure in octogenarians

doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2021.11.003
*The authors contributed equally to this manuscript
More Information
  •  OBJECTIVES  Whether left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in octogenarians yield similar net clinical benefit compared to younger patients, was the purpose of the present study.  METHODS Two real-world LAAC registries, enrolling 744 consecutive Amplatzer and Watchman patients from 2009 to 2018, were retrospectively analyzed.  RESULTS  All events are reported per 100 patient-years. Two hundred and sixty one octogenarians and 483 non-octogenarians with a mean follow-up of 1.7 ± 1.3 and 2.3 ± 1.6 years, and a total of 1,502 patient-years were included. Octogenarians had a higher risk for stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc score: 5.2 ± 1.2 vs. 4.3 ± 1.7, P < 0.0001) and bleeding (HAS-BLED score: 3.3 ± 0.8 vs. 3.1 ± 1.1, P = 0.001). The combined safety endpoint of major periprocedural complications and major bleeding events at follow-up was comparable (30/446, 6.7% vs. 47/1056, 4.4%; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73−1.98; P = 0.48) between the groups. The efficacy endpoint of all-cause stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular/unexplained death occurred more often in octogenarians (61/446, 13.7% vs. 80/1056, 7.6%; HR = 7.0; 95% CI: 4.53−10.93; P < 0.0001). Overall, octogenarians had a lower net clinical benefit, i.e., the composite of all above mentioned hazards, from LAAC compared to younger patients (82/446, 18.4% vs. 116/1056, 11.0%; HR = 4.6; 95% CI: 3.11−7.0; P < 0.0001). Compared to the anticipated stroke rate, the observed rate decreased by 41% in octogenarians and 53% in non-octogenarians. The observed bleeding rate was reduced by 10% octogenarians and 41% non-octogenarians.  CONCLUSIONS LAAC can be performed with similar safety in octogenarians as compared to younger patients. On the long-term, it both reduces stroke and bleeding events, although to a lesser extent than in non-octogenarians.
  • loading
  • [1]
    Zoni-Berisso M, Lercari F, Carazza T, Domenicucci S. Epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: European perspective. Clin Epidemiol 2014; 6: 213−220.
    [2]
    Marinigh R, Lip GY, Fiotti N, et al. Age as a risk factor for stroke in atrial fibrillation patients: implications for thromboprophylaxis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 827−837. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.028
    [3]
    Rodríguez-Mañero M, López-Pardo E, Cordero A, et al. Clinical profile and outcomes in octogenarians with atrial fibrillation: A community-based study in a specific European health care area. Int J Cardiol 2017; 243: 211−215. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.03.149
    [4]
    Hylek EM, D'Antonio J, Evans-Molina C, et al. Translating the results of randomized trials into clinical practice: the challenge of warfarin candidacy among hospitalized elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. Stroke 2006; 37: 1075−1080. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000209239.71702.ce
    [5]
    Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2021; 42: 373−498. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612
    [6]
    Glikson M, Wolff R, Hindricks G, et al. EHRA/EAPCI expert consensus statement on catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion-an update. EuroIntervention 2020; 15: 1133−1180. doi: 10.4244/EIJY19M08_01
    [7]
    Gafoor S, Franke J, Bertog S, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion in octogenarians: short-term and 1-year follow-up. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 83: 805−810. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25297
    [8]
    Price MJ, Reddy VY, Valderrábano M, et al. Bleeding outcomes after left atrial appendage closure compared with long-term warfarin: a pooled, patient-level analysis of the WATCHMAN randomized trial experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8: 1925−1932. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.08.035
    [9]
    Freixa X, Gafoor S, Regueiro A, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage occlusion in patients aged < 75 to ≥ 75 years. Am J Cardiol 2016; 117: 84−90. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.10.024
    [10]
    Cruz-González I, Ince H, Kische S, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients older than 85 years. Safety and efficacy in the EWOLUTION registry. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) 2020; 73: 21−27.
    [11]
    Yu J, Chen H, Post F, et al. Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in patients over 75 years. Heart Vessels 2019; 34: 1858−1865. doi: 10.1007/s00380-019-01428-8
    [12]
    Meier B, Blaauw Y, Khattab AA, et al. EHRA/EAPCI expert consensus statement on catheter-based left atrial appendage occlusion. EuroIntervention 2015; 10: 1109−1125. doi: 10.4244/EIJY14M09_18
    [13]
    Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation 2011; 123: 2736−2747. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.009449
    [14]
    Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. EuroIntervention 2012; 8: 782−795. doi: 10.4244/EIJV8I7A121
    [15]
    Hicks KA, Mahaffey KW, Mehran R, et al. 2017 Cardiovascular and stroke endpoint definitions for clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 71: 1021−1034. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.12.048
    [16]
    Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Turi ZG, et al. Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2009; 374: 534−542. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61343-X
    [17]
    Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, et al. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest 2010; 137: 263−272. doi: 10.1378/chest.09-1584
    [18]
    Lip GY, Frison L, Halperin JL, Lane DA. Comparative validation of a novel risk score for predicting bleeding risk in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation: the HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol Concomitantly) score. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57: 173−180. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.024
    [19]
    Berti S, Santoro G, Brscic E, et al. Left atrial appendage closure using AMPLATZER devices: A large, multicenter, Italian registry. Int J Cardiol 2017; 248: 103−107. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.07.052
    [20]
    Brachmann J, Lewalter T, Akin I, et al. Interventional occlusion of left atrial appendage in patients with atrial fibrillation. Acute and long-term outcome of occluder implantation in the LAARGE Registry. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2020; 58: 273−280.
    [21]
    Fauchier L, Cinaud A, Brigadeau F, et al. Device-related thrombosis after percutaneous left atrial appendage ccclusion for atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 71: 1528−1536. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.01.076
    [22]
    Saw J, Tzikas A, Shakir S, et al. Incidence and clinical impact of device-associated thrombus and peri-device leak following left atrial appendage closure with the amplatzer cardiac plug. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10: 391−399. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.11.029
    [23]
    Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. 5-year outcomes after left atrial appendage closure: from the PREVAIL and PROTECT AF trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 70: 2964−2975. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.021
    [24]
    Gloekler S, Fürholz M, de Marchi S, et al. Left atrial appendage closure versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation: the APPLY study. EuroIntervention 2020; 16(9): e767−e774. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-00201
    [25]
    Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Korsholm K, Damgaard D, et al. Clinical outcomes associated with left atrial appendage occlusion versus direct oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2021; 14: 69−78. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.09.051
    [26]
    López-Mínguez JR, Nogales-Asensio JM, Infante De Oliveira E, et al. Long-term event reduction after left atrial appendage closure. results of the iberian registry II. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) 2019; 72: 449−455.
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(3)  / Tables(4)

    Article Metrics

    Article views (871) PDF downloads(89) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return