Comparison of left atrial appendage closure and oral anticoagulation after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: concomitant and sequential cohorts of the OPTION randomized controlled trial

Abstract Introduction/Objectives Guidelines recommend continuation of anticoagulation following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in patients at high risk for stroke. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has not been well-studied for routine use post ablation. LAAC can be performed in separate procedures with cardiac ablation (sequentially) or concomitantly in the same operative session. In this prespecified subanalysis of the OPTION trial, timing of ablation relative to LAAC will be evaluated. Methods OPTION is a multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients with AF and an elevated CHA2DS2-VASc score undergoing catheter ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to catheter-based LAAC versus oral anticoagulation. Patients underwent an AF catheter ablation procedure between 90 and 180 days prior to randomization (sequential) or were planning to have catheter ablation within 10 days of randomization (concomitant). The primary safety endpoint was non-procedural major or clinically-relevant non-major bleeding. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, stroke, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The secondary endpoint was major bleeding through 36 months, including procedural bleeding. Results A total of 1600 patients with a mean age (±SD) of 70±8 years, and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 3.5±1.3 were randomized to anticoagulation. LAAC (n=803) was performed concomitantly with (n=328; 41%) or sequentially after (n=475; 59%) AF ablation. In the control arm (n=797), AF ablation was concomitant with randomization in 41% of patients (n=326) or sequential in 59% (n=471). Generally, patients in the sequential cohort had more clinical comorbidities. Clinical outcomes at 3 years will be available at the time of the presentation. Conclusions This subanalysis of OPTION will examine whether LAAC is a reasonable alternative to contemporary OAC after sequential or concomitant AF ablation in patients currently guideline recommended to stay on oral anticoagulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
EP Europace
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf085.516
Primary Topic
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of left atrial appendage closure and oral anticoagulation after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: concomitant and sequential cohorts of the OPTION randomized controlled trial

Kaushik Roy, Vijay Iyer, Marek Grygier, Walid I. Saliba et al.
EP Europace
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
article

Comparison of left atrial appendage closure and oral anticoagulation after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: concomitant and sequential cohorts of the OPTION randomized controlled trial

Kaushik Roy, Vijay Iyer, Marek Grygier, Walid I. Saliba, Nazmul Islam, Oussama M. Wazni, Thomas Christen, Brad Sutton, Stanislav Weiner, Devi G. Nair, José Luis Ibáñez, Guillaume Duthoit, Germán Calle Pérez, Yeruva Madhu Reddy
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction/Objectives Guidelines recommend continuation of anticoagulation following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in patients at high risk for stroke. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has not been well-studied for routine use post ablation. LAAC can be performed in separate procedures with cardiac ablation (sequentially) or concomitantly in the same operative session. In this prespecified subanalysis of the OPTION trial, timing of ablation relative to LAAC will be evaluated. Methods OPTION is a multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients with AF and an elevated CHA2DS2-VASc score undergoing catheter ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to catheter-based LAAC versus oral anticoagulation. Patients underwent an AF catheter ablation procedure between 90 and 180 days prior to randomization (sequential) or were planning to have catheter ablation within 10 days of randomization (concomitant). The primary safety endpoint was non-procedural major or clinically-relevant non-major bleeding. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, stroke, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The secondary endpoint was major bleeding through 36 months, including procedural bleeding. Results A total of 1600 patients with a mean age (±SD) of 70±8 years, and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 3.5±1.3 were randomized to anticoagulation. LAAC (n=803) was performed concomitantly with (n=328; 41%) or sequentially after (n=475; 59%) AF ablation. In the control arm (n=797), AF ablation was concomitant with randomization in 41% of patients (n=326) or sequential in 59% (n=471). Generally, patients in the sequential cohort had more clinical comorbidities. Clinical outcomes at 3 years will be available at the time of the presentation. Conclusions This subanalysis of OPTION will examine whether LAAC is a reasonable alternative to contemporary OAC after sequential or concomitant AF ablation in patients currently guideline recommended to stay on oral anticoagulation.

EP EuropaceVol. 27(Supplement_1)
Cleveland Clinic (US), The University of Kansas Health System (US), Boston Scientific (United States) (US), Sorbonne Université (FR), Trinity Mother Frances Hospitals and Clinics (US), Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (FR), Hospital General Universitario de Alicante Doctor Balmis (ES), Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar (ES), St. Joseph Medical Center (US), Marin Endocrine Care and Research (US), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL) (ES)
Boston Scientific Corporation
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.