Dataset Information

Double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effect of ASPIRIN discontinuation after left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation: protocol of the ASPIRIN LAAO trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

It is the common clinical practice to prescribe indefinite aspirin for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) post left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). However, aspirin as a primary prevention strategy for cardiovascular diseases has recently been challenged due to increased risk of bleeding. Therefore, aspirin discontinuation after LAAO in atrial fibrillation (ASPIRIN LAAO) trial is designed to assess the uncertainty about the risks and benefits of discontinuing aspirin therapy at 6 months postimplantation with a Watchman LAAO device in NVAF patients.

Methods and analysis

The ASPIRIN LAAO study is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial. Patients implanted with a Watchman device within 6 months prior to enrollment and without pre-existing conditions requiring long-term aspirin therapy according to current guidelines are eligible for participating the trial. Subjects will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation ratio to either the Aspirin group (aspirin 100 mg/day) or the control group (placebo) at 6 months postimplantation. A total of 1120 subjects will be enrolled from 12 investigational sites in China. The primary composite endpoint is stroke, systemic embolism, cardiovascular/unexplained death, major bleeding, acute coronary syndrome and coronary or periphery artery disease requiring revascularisation at 24 months. Follow-up visits are scheduled at 6 and 12 months and then every 12 months until 24 months after the last patient recruitment.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai, China (reference number XHEC-C-2018-065-5). The protocol is also submitted and approved by the institutional Ethics Committee at each participating centre. Results are expected in 2024 and will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presentations at national and international conferences.

Trial registration number

NCT03821883.

SUBMITTER: Chen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7970210 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPercutaneous left-atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established method for preventing strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation, offering an alternative to oral anticoagulation. Various occluder devices have been developed to cater to individual anatomical needs and ensure a safe and effective procedure. In this retrospective, monocentric cohort study, we compare different LAAO devices with respect to clinical outcomes, LAA sealing properties, and device-related complications.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 270 patients who underwent percutaneous LAA closure in our center between 2009 and 2023. Patient data were extracted from medical records, including gender, age at implantation, indication, device type and size, laboratory values, LAA anatomy, periprocedural complications, ECG parameters, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography parameters (TTE and TEE), as well as medication at discharge. Moreover, fluoroscopy time and implantation duration, as well as post-implantation clinical events up to 1 year, were collected. Endpoints were bleeding events, recurrent stroke, thrombi on devices, and death.ResultsThe implanted devices were the Watchman 2.5, Watchman FLX, Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP), and Amulet. The procedural success rate was 95.7% (n = 265), with cactus anatomy posing the most challenges across all devices. The mean patient age was 75.5 ± 7.7 years, with 64.5% being male. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.8 ± 1.5 and the median HAS-BLED score was 3.8 ± 1.0. Indications for LAA closure included past bleeding events and elevated bleeding risk. Periprocedural complications were most commonly bleeding at the puncture site, particularly after ACP implantation (p = 0.014). Significant peridevice leaks (PDL) were observed in 21.4% of simple sealing mechanism devices versus 0% in double sealing mechanism devices (p = 0.004). Thrombi were detected on devices in six patients, with no subsequent ischemic stroke or thromboembolic event. Comparative analysis revealed no significant differences in the occurrence of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), thromboembolic events, device-related thrombi, or mortality among different device types. A 62.3% relative risk reduction in thromboembolic events and 38.6% in major bleedings could be observed over 568.2 patient years.ConclusionsIn summary, our study highlights the efficacy and safety of LAA closure using various occluder devices despite anatomical challenges. Our long-term follow-up findings support LAA closure as a promising option for stroke prevention in selected patient cohorts. Further research is needed to refine patient selection criteria and optimize outcomes in LAA closure procedures.

Project description:BackgroundSurgical left atrial appendage occlusion (SLAAO) may be associated with a lower risk of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery. However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of SLAAO in patients undergoing mechanical heart valve replacement (MHVR) is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the association between SLAAO and the cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing MHVR.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed data for 497 patients with atrial fibrillation; 27.6% of the patients underwent SLAAO, and the remainder of the patients did not (No-SLAAO group). The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and all-cause mortality. Cumulative event-free survival rates were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves, and we performed multivariate Cox analyses to evaluate the association between SLAAO and outcomes. We used one-to-one propensity score matching to balance patients' baseline characteristics, and analyzed 120 matching pairs.ResultsFive patients died within 30 days postoperatively, and there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding in-hospital complications (all P > 0.05). After a median follow-up of 14 months, 14 primary events occurred. Kaplan-Meier curves showed no difference in the cumulative incidence of freedom from the primary outcome (log-rank P = 0.830), hemorrhagic events (log-rank P = 0.870), and the secondary outcome (log-rank P = 0.730), between the two groups. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed no association between SLAAO and any outcome (all P > 0.05). After propensity score matching, cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time, and the postoperative length of stay were significantly longer in the SLAAO group (all P < 0.05); results were similar to the unadjusted analyses.ConclusionsConcomitant SLAAO and MHVR was associated with longer length of stay, and cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time, but was not associated with additional protective effects against thromboembolic events and mortality during the 14-month follow-up.