Published in

MDPI, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(19), p. 13802, 2022

DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192113802

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Incidence and Predictors of Clinically Significant Bleedings after Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Closure

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Background: Transcatheter left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is performed in patients unsuitable for long-term anticoagulation, predominantly due to prior bleeding events. The study aimed to investigate the incidence and predictors of clinically significant bleeding (CSB) post-LAAC. Methods: Consecutive patients after LAAC with an Amplatzer or WATCHMAN device were analyzed (05.2014–11.2019). Bleeding was classified as CSB when associated with at least one of the following: death, ≥2 g/dL hemoglobin drop, ≥2 blood units transfusion, critical anatomic site, or hospitalization/invasive procedure. Results: Among 195 patients (age 74 (68–80), 43.1% females, HAS-BLED score 2.0 (2.0–3.0)), during median follow-up of 370 (IQR, 358–392) days, there were 15 nonprocedural CSBs in 14 (7.2%) patients. Of those, 9 (60.0%) occurred during postprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (median 46 (IQR: 16–60) days post-LAAC) vs. 6 (40%) after DAPT discontinuation (median 124 (81–210) days post-LAAC), translating into annualized CSB rates of 14.0% (per patient-year on DAPT) vs. 4.6% (per patient-year without DAPT). In 92.9% (13/14) of patients, the post-LAAC nonprocedural CSB was a recurrence from the same site as bleeding pre-LAAC. In the multivariable model, admission systolic blood pressure (SBP) > 127 mmHg (HR = 10.73, 1.37–84.26, p = 0.024), epistaxis history (HR = 5.84, 1.32–25.89, p = 0.020), permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) (HR = 4.55, 1.20–17.20, p = 0.025), and prior gastrointestinal bleeding (HR = 3.35, 1.01–11.08, p = 0.048) predicted post-LAAC CSB. Conclusions: Nonprocedural CSBs after LAAC, with a similar origin as the pre-LAAC bleedings, were observed predominantly during postprocedural DAPT and predicted by elevated admission SBP, prior epistaxis, permanent AF, and gastrointestinal bleeding history. Whether a more reserved post-LAAC antiplatelet regimen and stringent blood pressure control may improve LAAC outcomes remains to be studied.