Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Clinical Trial | Atrial Fibrillation | JAMA Network
[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.237.138.69. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Original Investigation
November 19, 2014

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Author Affiliations
  • 1Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City, New York
  • 2St John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, California
  • 3Homolka Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
  • 4Cardiovascular Center Frankfurt, Sankt Katharinen, Frankfurt, Germany
  • 5Foundation for Cardiovascular Medicine, La Jolla, California
  • 6St Luke’s Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri
  • 7Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah
  • 8Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
  • 9Arizona Heart Rhythm Center, Scottsdale
  • 10Boston Scientific, St Paul, Minnesota
  • 11Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
JAMA. 2014;312(19):1988-1998. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.15192
Abstract

Importance  While effective in preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), warfarin is limited by a narrow therapeutic profile, a need for lifelong coagulation monitoring, and multiple drug and diet interactions.

Objective  To determine whether a local strategy of mechanical left atrial appendage (LAA) closure was noninferior to warfarin.

Design, Setting, and Participants  PROTECT AF was a multicenter, randomized (2:1), unblinded, Bayesian-designed study conducted at 59 hospitals of 707 patients with nonvalvular AF and at least 1 additional stroke risk factor (CHADS2 score ≥1). Enrollment occurred between February 2005 and June 2008 and included 4-year follow-up through October 2012. Noninferiority required a posterior probability greater than 97.5% and superiority a probability of 95% or greater; the noninferiority margin was a rate ratio of 2.0 comparing event rates between treatment groups.

Interventions  Left atrial appendage closure with the device (n = 463) or warfarin (n = 244; target international normalized ratio, 2-3).

Main Outcomes and Measures  A composite efficacy end point including stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular/unexplained death, analyzed by intention-to-treat.

Results  At a mean (SD) follow-up of 3.8 (1.7) years (2621 patient-years), there were 39 events among 463 patients (8.4%) in the device group for a primary event rate of 2.3 events per 100 patient-years, compared with 34 events among 244 patients (13.9%) for a primary event rate of 3.8 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin (rate ratio, 0.60; 95% credible interval, 0.41-1.05), meeting prespecified criteria for both noninferiority (posterior probability, >99.9%) and superiority (posterior probability, 96.0%). Patients in the device group demonstrated lower rates of both cardiovascular mortality (1.0 events per 100 patient-years for the device group [17/463 patients, 3.7%] vs 2.4 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin [22/244 patients, 9.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21-0.75; P = .005) and all-cause mortality (3.2 events per 100 patient-years for the device group [57/466 patients, 12.3%] vs 4.8 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin [44/244 patients, 18.0%]; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance  After 3.8 years of follow-up among patients with nonvalvular AF at elevated risk for stroke, percutaneous LAA closure met criteria for both noninferiority and superiority, compared with warfarin, for preventing the combined outcome of stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular death, as well as superiority for cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.

Trial Registration  clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00129545

×