Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to review the evidence on the use of antithrombotic therapy and risk of device-related thrombosis after left atrial appendage closure. BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is increasingly performed for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, especially those who cannot tolerate or are ineligible for oral anticoagulation. METHODS: After device implantation for LAAC, different antithrombotic regimens with varying duration of therapy are currently used. Such selection depends on patients' risk for bleeding and physicians' choice. RESULTS: Device-related thrombosis remains an Achilles' heel of LAAC, and the etiology remains incompletely understood. Dual-antiplatelet therapy, and direct oral anticoagulation may have similar safety and device-related thrombosis occurrence in real-world LAAC registries compared with warfarin and aspirin. Device imaging surveillance should be routinely performed to assess for device-related thrombosis, which if diagnosed should be treated aggressively, as it is associated with higher thromboembolic risks. CONCLUSIONS: Given the uncertainties and therapeutic dilemma, the authors provide an in-depth discussion of the options and rationale for antithrombotic therapy post-LAAC.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.jcin.2018.11.001

Type

Journal article

Journal

JACC Cardiovasc Interv

Publication Date

11/05/2019

Keywords

atrial fibrillation, device-related thrombus, left atrial appendage closure