Skip to main content

Left Atrial Appendage Closure or Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation.

The New England journal of medicine2026-03-18PubMed
Total: 88.5Innovation: 8Impact: 0Rigor: 0Citation: 0

Summary

In CLOSURE-AF, catheter-based left atrial appendage closure did not achieve noninferiority to physician-directed best medical therapy for a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, or cardiovascular/unexplained death in high-risk AF. Findings question routine device use over optimized medical therapy in this population.

Key Findings

  • Multicenter German RCT (n=912) comparing LAA closure vs physician-directed best medical care in high-risk AF
  • Primary composite (stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, CV/unexplained death) did not meet noninferiority for LAA closure
  • Time-to-event noninferiority margin prespecified as HR 1.3; trial registered (NCT03463317)

Clinical Implications

Prioritize optimized, guideline-directed medical therapy (including DOACs when eligible) for stroke prevention in high-risk AF; reserve LAA closure for carefully selected cases with clear contraindications to anticoagulation after multidisciplinary discussion.

Why It Matters

A large multicenter RCT in NEJM provides definitive comparative effectiveness data, showing LAA closure is not noninferior to medical therapy in high-risk AF. This challenges expanding device indications and may recalibrate guidelines and payer policies.

Limitations

  • Abstract does not report detailed subgroup or procedural complication data
  • Generalizability may be influenced by regional practice patterns and evolving device technology

Future Directions

Define subgroups (e.g., absolute anticoagulation intolerance) who might benefit from LAA closure; evaluate newer-generation devices and periprocedural strategies in adequately powered, pragmatic trials.

Study Information

Study Type
RCT
Research Domain
Treatment
Evidence Level
I - Randomized controlled trial providing high-level evidence
Study Design
OTHER