Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Elderly: Insights From PROTECT-AF, PREVAIL, and Continuous Access Registries
Authors' conclusion
Despite the higher event rates, octogenarians derive similar benefits from LAAO as their younger counterparts.
Study context
- Population
- Patients enrolled in randomized trials and nonrandomized registries of the Watchman 2.5 left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) device
- Participants
- 2,258 patients
- Comparison
- LAAO vs control, by age ≥80 vs <80 years
- ≥80n = 570
- <80n = 1,688reference
- Outcome
- Composite of:
- CV/unknown death
- Stroke
- Systemic embolism
- Follow-up
- 5 years
Methodological detailsinverse probability weighting
- Inverse probability weighting
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Primary endpoint, device vs control, by age subgroup
<80
- Device
- 12.0%
- Control
- 13.8%
≥80
- Device
- 25.3%
- Control
- 21.7%
Device
<8012.0%
≥8025.3%
Control
<8013.8%
≥8021.7%
Device vs ControlHazard ratio (95% CI)
<80 years
0.9(0.6–1.4)
≥80 years
1.2(0.7–2.0)
Further pooled results
Secondary outcomes (CV/unknown death, stroke, systemic embolism, major and nonprocedural bleeding)
- No interaction between age and treatment effect for any of the secondary outcomes
Average treatment effect of LAAO vs warfarin (inverse probability weighting)
- Similar in the elderly vs younger patients
Safety
Procedural complications · 7 days
- Similar in both age groups
Original publication
Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the Elderly: Insights From PROTECT-AF, PREVAIL, and Continuous Access Registries. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Published 27 February 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →