Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 Apr 22;25(1):304.
doi: 10.1186/s12872-025-04736-2.

Optimal duration of anticoagulation after left atrial appendage closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xuan Lu  1 , Zhenyu Yang  1 , Wei Fang  1 , Xiaona Niu  1 , Qiuhe Wang  2 , Yan Li  3
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Optimal duration of anticoagulation after left atrial appendage closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xuan Lu et al. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. .

Abstract

Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has become the treatment of choice for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who are at high risk of bleeding or with contraindications for anticoagulation. However, the optimal duration of anticoagulation after LAAC remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the optimal duration of treatment with novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) after LAAC.

Method: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for studies related to LAAC published from inception to 20 December 2023, and performed a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of 45-day and 3-month postoperative NOAC treatment using R4.3.1 software.

Results: A total of 14 studies were included in this study, of which 4 were prospective cohort studies and 10 were retrospective cohort studies. The incidence of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (0.018 [95% CI: 0.007-0.033] in the 3-month group and 0.005 [95% CI: 0.001-0.011] in the 45-day group; P = 0.07) and the incidence of device-related thrombus (0.025 [95% CI: 0.002-0.065] in the 3-month group and 0.020 [ 95% CI: 0.007-0.037] in the 45-day group; P = 0.81) were not significantly different. However, the incidence of major bleeding was significantly greater in the 3-month group than in the 45-day group (0.033 [95% CI: 0.018-0.053] in the 3-month group and 0.003 [95% CI: 0.000-0.008] in the 45-day group; P < 0.01).

Conclusions: Compared with the 3-month scheme, 45 days of postoperative anticoagulation significantly reduced the risk of major bleeding in patients without compromising the efficacy of preventing stroke or transient ischaemic attack and device-related thrombus.

Trial registration: Our meta-analysis was registered in the PROSPERO international database (CRD42024524661).

Keywords: Left atrial appendage closure; Major bleeding; Novel oral anticoagulants; Stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethical and IRB approval of this analysis were not required as no human or animal subjects were involved. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plots to compare the incidence of stroke or TIA between the 3-month and 45-day NOAC schemes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke or TIA between the two groups (0.018 [95% CI: 0.007–0.033] in the 3-month group vs. 0.005 [95% CI: 0.001–0.011] in the 45-day group; P = 0.07)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plots to compare the incidence of DRT between the 3-month and 45-day NOAC schemes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of DRT between the two groups (0.025 [95% CI: 0.002–0.065] in the 3-month group vs. 0.020 [95% CI: 0.007–0.037] in the 45-day group; P = 0.81)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plots to compare the incidence of major bleeding between the 3-month and 45-day NOAC schemes. The incidence of major bleeding events was significantly greater in the 3-month group than in the 45-day group (0.033 [95% CI: 0.018–0.053] vs. 0.003 [95% CI: 0.000–0.008], P < 0.01)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Holmes DR Jr, et al. “Prospective randomized evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure device in patients with atrial fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy: the PREVAIL trial,” (in eng). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(1):1–12. - PubMed
    1. Reddy VY, et al. “Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure vs warfarin for atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial,” (in eng). JAMA. 2014;312(19):1988–98. - PubMed
    1. Reddy VY, et al. “5-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: From the PREVAIL and PROTECT AF Trials,” (in eng). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(24):2964–75. - PubMed
    1. Holmes DR, et al. “Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial,” (in eng). Lancet. 2009;374(9689):534–42. - PubMed
    1. Joglar JA, et al. “2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines,” (in eng). Circulation. 2024;149(1):e1–156. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources