Left Atrial Appendage Thrombus and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Anticoagulated Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter Referred for a Rhythm-Control Strategy: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study
- 1Faculty of Medicine, Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce, al. IX Wieków Kielc 19A, 25-516 Kielce, Poland
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Whether long-term prognosis differs between patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and those with atrial flutter (AFL) after adjustment for baseline cardiovascular characteristics remains unclear. Methods: In this prospective observational cohort study, we enrolled 656 patients meeting predefined anticoagulation eligibility criteria with AF (n = 558) or AFL (n = 98) who underwent transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) before a planned rhythm-control intervention. The primary endpoint was left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT) detected at the index TEE. Long-term outcomes included cardiovascular death, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and systemic thromboembolism. Results: LAAT was detected in 14.2% of patients with AF and 10.2% of patients with AFL (p = 0.29). After multivariable adjustment, AFL versus AF was not independently associated with LAAT (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25–1.11; p = 0.09). Median follow-up was 6.85 (3.64–8.53) years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 96 patients (14.6%; AF: n = 78, AFL: n = 18), and HF hospitalization occurred in 91 patients (13.9%; AF: n = 78, AFL: n = 13). Log-rank comparisons were not statistically significant for cardiovascular death (log-rank p = 0.42) or HF hospitalization (log-rank p = 0.73). In extended Cox models that accounted for nonproportional hazards, AFL versus AF was not independently associated with cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.09; 95% CI, 0.64–1.85; p = 0.75) or HF hospitalization (aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.37–1.27; p = 0.23). Conclusions: Catheter ablation was recorded in 83.7% of AFL versus 24.6% of AF patients, including index-hospitalization ablation in 46.9% versus 0%, respectively. In this selected cohort meeting predefined anticoagulation eligibility criteria referred for TEE-guided rhythm control, no statistically significant independent association was detected between index arrhythmia type (AF versus AFL) and LAAT, cardiovascular death, or HF hospitalization. Importantly, these findings describe associations under markedly different subsequent rhythm-control treatment pathways and do not establish equivalent intrinsic risks for AF and AFL. The smaller AFL group (n = 98) and wide confidence intervals limit precision; clinically meaningful differences cannot be excluded. These findings should not be extrapolated to unselected AF/AFL populations, including asymptomatic patients, those managed exclusively with rate control, or patients not receiving anticoagulation. The comparison is based on presenting arrhythmia, not a rhythm phenotype confirmed to persist throughout follow-up; incident AF among patients initially presenting with AFL was not systematically ascertained.
Related
- Pulmonary Vein Isolation with Different Single-Shot Ablation Devices in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Prospective Observational Single-Center Clinical Evaluation
- The “Floating Lotus” Sign on Intracardiac Echocardiography: Characterization and Predictors of a Novel Left Atrial Appendage Pseudo-Thrombus
- Suture-Mediated Vascular Closure Improves Same-Day Discharge in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion
- Echocardiographic Framework for Left Atrial Appendage Morphology Assessment and Thromboembolic Risk Stratification in Atrial Fibrillation.
- Left atrial appendage occlusion: an alternative to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation
BibTeX
@article{turek2026left,
title = {{Left Atrial Appendage Thrombus and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Anticoagulated Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter Referred for a Rhythm-Control Strategy: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study}},
author = {Łukasz Turek and Marcin Sadowski and Łukasz Zandecki and Jacek Kurzawski and Marianna Janion},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218552},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8552},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Left Atrial Appendage Thrombus and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Anticoagulated Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter Referred for a Rhythm-Control Strategy: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study
AU - Łukasz Turek
AU - Marcin Sadowski
AU - Łukasz Zandecki
AU - Jacek Kurzawski
AU - Marianna Janion
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/03
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218552
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8552
AB - Background/Objectives: Whether long-term prognosis differs between patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and those with atrial flutter (AFL) after adjustment for baseline cardiovascular characteristics remains unclear. Methods: In this prospective observational cohort study, we enrolled 656 patients meeting predefined anticoagulation eligibility criteria with AF (n = 558) or AFL (n = 98) who underwent transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) before a planned rhythm-control intervention. The primary endpoint was left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT) detected at the index TEE. Long-term outcomes included cardiovascular death, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and systemic thromboembolism. Results: LAAT was detected in 14.2% of patients with AF and 10.2% of patients with AFL (p = 0.29). After multivariable adjustment, AFL versus AF was not independently associated with LAAT (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25–1.11; p = 0.09). Median follow-up was 6.85 (3.64–8.53) years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 96 patients (14.6%; AF: n = 78, AFL: n = 18), and HF hospitalization occurred in 91 patients (13.9%; AF: n = 78, AFL: n = 13). Log-rank comparisons were not statistically significant for cardiovascular death (log-rank p = 0.42) or HF hospitalization (log-rank p = 0.73). In extended Cox models that accounted for nonproportional hazards, AFL versus AF was not independently associated with cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.09; 95% CI, 0.64–1.85; p = 0.75) or HF hospitalization (aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.37–1.27; p = 0.23). Conclusions: Catheter ablation was recorded in 83.7% of AFL versus 24.6% of AF patients, including index-hospitalization ablation in 46.9% versus 0%, respectively. In this selected cohort meeting predefined anticoagulation eligibility criteria referred for TEE-guided rhythm control, no statistically significant independent association was detected between index arrhythmia type (AF versus AFL) and LAAT, cardiovascular death, or HF hospitalization. Importantly, these findings describe associations under markedly different subsequent rhythm-control treatment pathways and do not establish equivalent intrinsic risks for AF and AFL. The smaller AFL group (n = 98) and wide confidence intervals limit precision; clinically meaningful differences cannot be excluded. These findings should not be extrapolated to unselected AF/AFL populations, including asymptomatic patients, those managed exclusively with rate control, or patients not receiving anticoagulation. The comparison is based on presenting arrhythmia, not a rhythm phenotype confirmed to persist throughout follow-up; incident AF among patients initially presenting with AFL was not systematically ascertained.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -