Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Anticoagulation for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) are stroke prevention strategies for patients with atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVES: To compare stroke and bleeding outcomes from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing LAAC to OAC. METHODS: The primary outcome was stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE). Secondary outcomes included ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, major bleeding (MB), clinically significant bleeding (MB + clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding), non-procedure related clinically-significant bleeding, and cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. RESULTS: -VASc scores and did not exceed 0.37%/year in any nonwarfarin-OAC comparative trial. In postablation patients, LAAC showed similar stroke/SE rates (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.53-1.60; P-interaction = 0.76) and less nonprocedural clinically significant bleeding (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.42-0.62; P-interaction = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: LAAC prevents stroke/SE at rates not significantly different from OAC while reducing clinically significant bleeding, with possibly a more favorable benefit in postablation patients. In the full cohort, the numerically higher ischemic stroke rate was not statistically significant, and small in absolute terms. These findings support LAAC based on individualized, patient-centered decision-making, balancing stroke and bleeding risks.