Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 10 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Left atrial appendage occlusion: an alternative to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation

  • Yosra Messaoudi1,2
  • Olivier Roux3
  • Pierre Monney4,5
  • Olivier Muller4,5
  • Fabian Nietlispach3
5 affiliations
  1. 1Faculté de Médecine de Sousse, Université de Sousse
  2. 2Department of Cardiology, Ibn El Jazzar Hospital
  3. 3University Heart Center, University Hospital Zurich
  4. 4Department of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital
  5. 5Department of Cardiology, University of Lausanne
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Global Burden of Disease estimates indicate that 52.6 million individuals were living with AF or atrial flutter in 2021, and one in three to one in five persons are expected to develop AF during their lifetime. AF is associated with an increased risk of stroke, systemic thromboembolism, and death. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the first-line strategy for preventing AF-associated embolism. However, embolic events still occur in 1%–4% of anticoagulated patients per year, major bleeding occurs in 2%–4% per year, and long-term adherence to direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is incomplete. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) was developed as a mechanical alternative to address these unmet needs. The evidence base has changed substantially over the last 2 years: three randomized controlled trials comparing LAAO with DOAC—OPTION, CHAMPION-AF, and CLOSURE-AF—have now reported. In this update, we summarize the pathophysiological rationale, the technical aspects of the procedure, and the totality of the randomized and observational evidence, including a 2026 meta-analysis of 5,890 randomized patients. Taken together, these data indicate that LAAO reduces non-procedure-related bleeding but does not decrease all-cause major bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage, or mortality, and may carry a higher risk of ischaemic stroke than DOAC. LAAO remains an established option for patients with contraindications to or intolerance of long-term OAC. In DOAC-eligible patients, it has become a randomized-tested alternative, but current evidence supports an individualized, shared decision rather than a universal offer. We outline the remaining controversies—patient selection, device-related thrombus, peri-device leak, post-procedural antithrombotic therapy, and the interpretation of observational data—and the trials designed to resolve them.

Related

  1. Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Meta-analysis
    Amar Rai, Abhinav Kandala, Harroop Bola +12
    Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textClinical trials & evidence synthesisPMCEurope PMC
  2. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion versus oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: A pragmatic meta-analysis of randomized trials within the DOAC era.
    Gabriel Moraes Kuniyoshi, Rafael Zoppi Campane, Nikita Patil +3
    American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practicePeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textCardiovascular medicineEurope PMC
  3. Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion versus Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation
    Aravind Dilli Babu, MD, Scott J. Cameron, MD, PhD, Haroon Gill, MD +8
    JACC: AdvancesPeer-reviewedCC BYFull text1 citedCardiovascular medicineDOAJ
  4. Left atrial appendage occlusion versus oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Ahmed R Gonnah, Ahmed K. Awad, Adel Mouffokes +7
    BMC MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Cardiovascular medicineCrossref
  5. Suture-Mediated Vascular Closure Improves Same-Day Discharge in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion
    Mark J. Shen, Shal T. Shen, Hannah Serrano
    JACC Case ReportsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textCardiovascular medicinePMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{messaoudi2026left,
  title = {{Left atrial appendage occlusion: an alternative to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation}},
  author = {Yosra Messaoudi and Olivier Roux and Pierre Monney and Olivier Muller and Fabian Nietlispach},
  journal = {Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fcvm.2026.1889918},
  url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2026.1889918/full},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Left atrial appendage occlusion: an alternative to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation
AU  - Yosra Messaoudi
AU  - Olivier Roux
AU  - Pierre Monney
AU  - Olivier Muller
AU  - Fabian Nietlispach
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/15
JO  - Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
DO  - 10.3389/fcvm.2026.1889918
UR  - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2026.1889918/full
AB  - Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Global Burden of Disease estimates indicate that 52.6 million individuals were living with AF or atrial flutter in 2021, and one in three to one in five persons are expected to develop AF during their lifetime. AF is associated with an increased risk of stroke, systemic thromboembolism, and death. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the first-line strategy for preventing AF-associated embolism. However, embolic events still occur in 1%–4% of anticoagulated patients per year, major bleeding occurs in 2%–4% per year, and long-term adherence to direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is incomplete. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) was developed as a mechanical alternative to address these unmet needs. The evidence base has changed substantially over the last 2 years: three randomized controlled trials comparing LAAO with DOAC—OPTION, CHAMPION-AF, and CLOSURE-AF—have now reported. In this update, we summarize the pathophysiological rationale, the technical aspects of the procedure, and the totality of the randomized and observational evidence, including a 2026 meta-analysis of 5,890 randomized patients. Taken together, these data indicate that LAAO reduces non-procedure-related bleeding but does not decrease all-cause major bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage, or mortality, and may carry a higher risk of ischaemic stroke than DOAC. LAAO remains an established option for patients with contraindications to or intolerance of long-term OAC. In DOAC-eligible patients, it has become a randomized-tested alternative, but current evidence supports an individualized, shared decision rather than a universal offer. We outline the remaining controversies—patient selection, device-related thrombus, peri-device leak, post-procedural antithrombotic therapy, and the interpretation of observational data—and the trials designed to resolve them.
SN  - 2297-055X
ER  -