A significant proportion of patients who suffer from atrial fibrillation (AF) and are in need of thromboembolic protection are not treated with oral anticoagulation or discontinue this treatment shortly after its initiation. This undertreatment has not improved sufficiently despite the availability of direct oral anticoagulants which are associated with less major bleeding than vitamin K antagonists. Multiple reasons account for this, including bleeding events or ischaemic strokes whilst on anticoagulation, a serious risk of bleeding events, poor treatment compliance despite best educational attempts, or aversion to drug therapy. An alternative interventional therapy, which is not associated with long-term bleeding and is as effective as vitamin K anticoagulation, was introduced over 20 years ago. Because of significant improvements in procedural safety over the years, left atrial appendage closure, predominantly achieved using a catheter-based, device implantation approach, is increasingly favoured for the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients who cannot achieve effective anticoagulation. This management strategy is well known to the interventional cardiologist/electrophysiologist but is not more widely appreciated within cardiology or internal medicine. This article introduces the devices and briefly explains the implantation technique. The indications and device follow-up are more comprehensively described. Almost all physicians who care for adult patients will have many with AF. This practical guide, written within guideline/guidance boundaries, is aimed at those non-implanting physicians who may need to refer patients for consideration of this new therapy, which is becoming increasingly popular.

• Keywords
• Anticoagulation, Atrial fibrillation, Bleeding, Left atrial appendage closure, Left atrial appendage occlusion, Prevention, Stroke,
• MeSH
• Anticoagulants adverse effects   MeSH
• Stroke * prevention & control   complications   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Atrial Fibrillation * complications   diagnosis   surgery   MeSH
• Consensus MeSH
• Hemorrhage chemically induced   prevention & control   MeSH
• Physicians * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Atrial Appendage * surgery   MeSH
• Thromboembolism * etiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Left Atrial Appendage Closure MeSH
• Vitamin K MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Anticoagulants MeSH
• Vitamin K MeSH

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) has been considered the standard of care for stroke prophylaxis for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; however, many individuals are unable or unwilling to take long-term OAC. The safety and efficacy of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) have been controversial, and new trial data have recently emerged. We therefore sought to perform an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing OAC to percutaneous LAAC, focusing on individual clinical endpoints. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2000 through December 2021 for all RCTs comparing percutaneous LAAC to OAC in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Fixed and random effects meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) were performed using the longest follow-up duration available by intention-to-treat. The prespecified primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Three RCTs enrolling 1516 patients were identified. The weighted mean follow-up was 54.7 months. LAAC was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.96; p = 0.023), hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.61; p = 0.003), and major nonprocedural bleeding (HR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between LAAC and OAC for any other endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence from RCTs suggests LAAC therapy is associated with reduced long-term risk of death compared with OAC. This may be driven by reductions in hemorrhagic stroke and major nonprocedural bleeding. There were no significant differences in the risk of all stroke. Further large-scale clinical trials are needed to validate these findings.

• Keywords
• Atrial fibrillation, Left atrial appendage closure, Meta-analysis, Stroke,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

• MeSH
• Risk Assessment MeSH
• Consensus MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Arrhythmias, Cardiac * diagnosis   therapy   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Asia MeSH
• Latin America MeSH