Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Active, not recruiting
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT03088098 |
Other study ID # |
2015-0459 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Active, not recruiting |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
May 2, 2016 |
Est. completion date |
September 14, 2024 |
Study information
Verified date |
May 2024 |
Source |
University of Zurich |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Study category and Rationale Clinical study, Category A.
Clinical Phase: Post market study
Background and Rationale: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) allows avoiding oral
anticoagulation and provides at the same time an at least equally good protection from
strokes and peripheral embolism. It may therefore be an attractive alternative to oral
anticoagulation in the patient population undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation
(TAVI): the concept of LAAO is based on the fact that thrombus formation in atrial
fibrillation occurs in >90% in the left atrial appendage (LAA). Mechanical occlusion of the
LAA reduces the stroke risk by eliminating the source of thrombus formation. In the here
proposed "Randomized Comparison of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion versus Standard Medical
Therapy in Patients in Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve
Implantation", study we test the hypothesis, that LAAO is superior to standard medical
therapy in the high-risk TAVI population. This hypothesis has not been investigated by
previous studies so far.
Overall Objective(s): Overall objective: to compare the safety (and efficacy) of LAAO using
the St. Jude left atrial appendage closure device with standard medical therapy in a
prospective, multi-center, randomized trial in patients undergoing TAVI in routine clinical
practice.
Primary Objective: To assess the safety of the device intervention with regard to stroke
prevention and prevention of bleeding complications in a patients population at high risk of
stroke and bleeding.
Secondary Objectives: Short-term (procedural) safety of device intervention is assessed (rate
of successful deployment of a left atrial appendage occluder; rate of kidney failure). As a
further secondary objective, long-term effects of device intervention on stroke and bleeding
prevention as well as mortality are assessed and compared to medical therapy.
Outcome(s): Primary: Composite endpoint of ischemic and hemorrhagic neurologic events,
peripheral embolism, life-threatening/disabling and major bleeding complications and
cardiovascular mortality at 1 year
Secondary: All deaths (cardiac and non-cardiac) at 30 days, 1, 3, and 5 years Device success
at 30 days
In-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI)
Study design: An investigator-initiated, randomized, multicenter, non-blinded, all-comers
study
Measurements and Procedures: 80 patients in atrial fibrillation undergoing TAVI will be
randomized in a non-blinded fashion (1:1 randomization) to LAAO (device group) or SMT at the
operators' discretion (medical group; antiplatelet therapy and oral anticoagulation or oral
anticoagulation alone). All patients will be followed for up to 5 years. The primary analysis
will be performed at 30 days and after completion of a 1-year follow-up.
80 patients in atrial fibrillation undergoing TAVI will be randomized in a non-blinded
fashion (1:1 randomization) to LAAO (device group) or standard medical therapy (SMT) at the
operators' discretion (medical group; antiplatelet therapy, oral anticoagulation or oral
anticoagulation alone).
Estimated duration for the main investigational plan from start of screening of first
participant to last participant processed and finishing the study: 6 years
Description:
Background and Rationale
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive treatment option for
patients suffering from severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Superiority of TAVI over medical
treatment has been shown in the randomized PARTNER B trial followed by the PARTNER A trial
showing non-inferiority over a more invasive open-heart surgical aortic valve replacement in
high-risk patients. Over the last years, many patients have been successfully treated with
TAVI worldwide.
Peri- and post-procedural morbidity differed considerably between the surgical and
interventional treatment group in the PARTNER A trial: while major bleeding (19.5% vs 9.3% at
30 days) and new onset atrial fibrillation (16% vs 8.6% at 30 days) occur more often in
surgically treated patients, vascular access complications (3.8 vs 17% at 30 days) and
neurologic events (5.5% vs 2.4% at 30 days) are more frequently encountered in the TAVI
population. The higher rate of neurologic events in the TAVI group was of particular concern,
given its association with a higher mortality and the clinical impact of major neurologic
events on patient's quality of life and daily functioning. Only about 40-50% of strokes occur
intra-procedurally, followed by a higher hazard rate in the first week and a constant hazard
thereafter. After 30 months, the surgical group experienced a numerically higher stroke rate,
although not statistically significant. Measures to reduce procedural and post-procedural
stroke rate were and are still looked for.
While procedural strokes can be most likely reduced by improvements in valve delivery systems
(smaller delivery systems) and more operator experience, cerebral protection devices are
currently tested in trials but preliminary results are rather disappointing. Risk factors for
post-procedural strokes after TAVI are a previous history of stroke, more extensive
peripheral vascular disease, and higher functional class.
A subgroup of patients of particular concern are patients suffering from atrial fibrillation:
predictor of early (day 1-30) cerebrovascular events was new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR
2.76), whereas chronic atrial fibrillation was a predictor (OR 2.84) for the occurrence of
late (>30 days) cerebrovascular events. Amat-Santos reported a higher rate of
strokes/systemic embolism in patients with in hospital new onset atrial fibrillation after
TAVI (13.6% vs 3.2% after 30 days). Patients diagnosed with new onset atrial fibrillation
during or after the procedure in which no anticoagulation was initiated experienced an
alarmingly high 30-day stroke rate of 40%.
Despite these results and the high prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) of about 33% in the
overall TAVI population, only 30% of AF patients were on vitamin K antagonists (VKA) before,
and only 70% after TAVI. While oral anticoagulation is an effective medical treatment for
ischemic stroke prevention in these patients, it is often withheld from patients given their
high risk of bleeding. TAVI patients typically not only suffer from much co-morbidity and are
poly-medicated, but also suffer from a lot of bleeding risk factors. The bleeding risk score
(HASBLED score) expresses the risk of major bleeding with a scoring system consisting of 9
individual risk factors for bleeding; a patient is at high risk for bleeding, if 3 or more
factors are present. The stroke risk score (CHA2DS2-Vasc score) comprises of 9 individual
risk scores for stroke in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation. Both risk scores share
common risk factors, such as age, hypertension and previous stroke. It is therefore not
surprising that patients at highest risk for stroke are at the same time at highest risk for
major bleedings. The TAVI population forms such a high risk group with a high prevalence of
the above risk factors: average patients age in the PARTNER trial was 84 years, with 11%
showing severe renal impairment, about 75% had an indication for concomitant acetylsalicylic
acid use and all suffered per definition from heart failure. In Stortecky's study on TAVI
patients suffering AF, the average CHA2DS2-Vasc score was 4.5, with >95% of patients having a
score >3.
Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) allows avoiding oral anticoagulation and provides at
the same time an at least equally good protection from strokes and peripheral embolism. It
may therefore be an attractive alternative to oral anticoagulation in the TAVI patient
population: the concept of LAAO is based on the fact that thrombus formation in atrial
fibrillation occurs in >90% in the left atrial appendage (LAA). Mechanical occlusion of the
LAA reduces the stroke risk by eliminating the source of thrombus formation.
Clinical studies proved this concept to be true: the PROTECT-AF study randomized >700
patients to either LAA occlusion or medical therapy (VKA). At one year, non-inferiority of
LAAO was proven, with numerically less embolic events in the LAAO group. At a European
conference (EuroPCR conference) 2013, Holmes (principal investigator of the PROTECT-AF trial)
reported 4-year follow-up data with a significant 40% reduction of the composite of
stroke/peripheral embolism/cardiovascular death and a 34% reduction of all cause mortality in
the LAAO group as compared to oral anticoagulation. By reducing bleeding complications, it
can be anticipated that morbidity and mortality will continue to diverge between the two
groups. Comparable results from a large registry using Amplatzer devices (St. Jude Medical,
St. Paul, USA) for LAAO were reported: after an average follow-up of 32 months,
cardiovascular death, stroke, and peripheral embolism occurred in 7% of patients. In the
latter study, oral anticoagulation was instantly stopped after LAAO in all patients.
In the here proposed "Randomized Comparison of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion versus
Standard Medical Therapy of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Transfemoral
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation", study the investigators test the hypothesis, that
LAAO is superior to standard medical therapy in the high-risk TAVI population. This
hypothesis has not been investigated by previous studies so far. The design is an
investigator-initiated, randomized, multicenter, non-blinded, all-comers study. It is
understood, that this is a pilot trial with the intention to prove safety, but which is
underpowered to show superiority over medical therapy.