Catheter-based left atrial appendage CLOSURE in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding as compared to best medical therapy: Rationale and design of the prospective randomized CLOSURE-AF trial

ABSTRACT

Background

Percutaneous catheter‐based left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is a potential alternative to oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The effectiveness and safety of LAA closure in patients with AF at high risk of stroke (CHA2DS2‐VASc Score ≥2) and high risk of bleeding compared to best medical care including a nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant [NOAC] when considered eligible is not known.

Methods/Design

The prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical Left atrial appendage CLOSURE in patients with Atrial Fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding compared to medical therapy (CLOSURE-AF) trial compared catheter-based LAA closure to best medical care (including NOAC therapy if considered eligible) in patients with AF at high risk of stroke and with either a history of bleeding or a high estimated bleeding risk (HASBLED ≥ 3). The primary endpoint is time to a composite of first stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), systemic embolism, cardiovascular or unexplained death or major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3-5). Secondary outcomes include components of the primary outcome and total mortality. The primary efficacy analysis will be performed in the intention‐to‐treat population using Cox regression models for noninferiority with an option to test for superiority once noninferiority has been proven.

Results

The first patient in the CLOSURE-AF trial was enrolled in March 2018. By April 2025 the complete study cohort of n = 912 patients had been enrolled in 42 sites.

Conclusion

CLOSURE-AF will contribute evidence on the effectiveness and safety of LAA occlusion compared to optimal medical therapy in patients with AF at high risk of stroke and bleeding. The trial results will help to define the clinical use of catheter-based LAA closure in the future.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03463317

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most frequent cardiac arrhythmia, is a significant healthcare challenge given its increasing incidence in the aging population and its association with elevated risks of cardiovascular events, in particular stroke, and mortality. , For decades, oral anticoagulation (OAC) with warfarin has been the standard of care for stroke prevention in AF. Although effective, a substantial proportion of eligible AF patients are treated either suboptimal or not at all with OAC mainly because of an increased bleeding risk, bleeding complications such as intracranial hemorrhage and the need for lifelong OAC monitoring. Nonvitamin K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were developed primarily to obviate difficulties of using warfarin. In large, randomized clinical trials, all available NOACs have shown at least similar efficacy for stroke prevention in AF as compared to warfarin, but with a more favorable safety profile, especially concerning intracranial bleeding. ,,, However, despite NOACs overcoming some limitations of warfarin treatment a significant proportion of AF patients cannot be chronically treated with (N)OACs because they have contraindications, eg, are at a very high risk of bleeding, had bleeding complications or are intolerant. The large prospective randomized phase III trials comparing NOAC treatment with warfarin excluded patients after a major hemorrhage, and 20-30% of study patients discontinued NOAC treatment at 2 years. ,,, Therefore, there is an urgent need to examine alternative treatment approaches for stroke prevention in AF patients who are at high bleeding risk or who cannot tolerate long-term (N)OAC because of safety concerns and subsequently an unacceptable high risk for disabling events including stroke.

Device-based strategies to prevent thromboembolism from the left atrial appendage (LAA), a preferred site for atrial thrombus formation, have emerged as an alternative to (N)OAC therapy. Percutaneous catheter-based LAA closure provided a similar protection against stroke, systemic embolism, and cardiovascular mortality as compared with warfarin or NOAC treatment in moderate-sized clinical studies. ,,, LAA closure comes with a certain peri‑procedural risk, although this has been reduced with increased operator-experience and device developments and optimsations. , Catheter-based LAA closure devices have been tested in relatively few patients and are limited to 2 randomized warfarin-controlled studies , and 2 NOAC-controlled trials. , However, there is no trial in a patient population with a high risk of bleeding. The randomized warfarin-controlled trials (PROTECT AF, PREVAIL) included only patients who were eligible for OAC therapy while the NOAC-controlled trials PRAGUE-17 11 and OPTION investigated patients with low or moderate bleeding risk. In clinical practice LAA occlusion is thought to provide the best net clinical benefit in patients with AF who have a high-stroke risk, but who also have a very high risk of major bleedings. So far LAA occlusion in such patients has not been reported from a randomized controlled clinical trial as compared to best medical care (including NOAC when eligible), and such evidence is urgently needed. Therefore, a large-scale randomized multicenter trial is required in patients with AF with high ischemic and high bleeding risk to investigate the efficacy and safety of catheter-based LAA closure versus best medical care including NOACs when eligible.

Methods

Study rationale

CLOSURE-AF (Left atrial appendage CLOSURE in patients with Atrial Fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding compared to medical therapy: a prospective randomized clinical trial) was designed to determine the clinical outcome after percutaneous catheter‐based LAA closure in patients with AF at high risk of stroke (CHA2DS2‐VASc Score ≥ 2) as well as high risk of bleeding as compared to best medical care (including a nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant [NOAC] when eligible).

Study oversight

CLOSURE-AF is an investigator-initiated clinical study that is funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK) and performed in collaboration with Atrial Fibrillation Network Association (AFNET, Muenster, Germany). Sponsor is Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. The trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier NCT03463317). Project management is performed by AFNET (Muenster, Germany). Study site management and monitoring is performed largely by the Clinical Trial Unit of the Charité University Medicine Berlin.

Data cleaning and preparation is performed by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research data management group in collaboration with the Clinical Trial Unit of the Charité. An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) monitors patient safety on an ongoing basis and has access to unblinded data.

The study adheres to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and to specifications of the International Conference of Harmonization. The study underwent approval by a central ethics committee (LAGESO, Berlin) and institutional review board at each site.

Study design

CLOSURE-AF was designed as a prospective, multicenter, event-driven, randomized open clinical trial with a 2-arm parallel group design and blind outcome assessment (PROBE design). Catheter-based LAA closure will be compared in a 1:1 randomization to best medical care (including NOAC therapy) in AF patients at high risk of stroke and bleeding ( Figure 1 ). Randomization is performed electronically stratified by study center.

Figure 1

CLOSURE-AF study design diagram (of original study plan). *At least 18 months and 6 months follow up after 1th and 2nd interim analysis, respectively. BARC = bleeding academic research consortium definition for bleeding; HASBLED = hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile INR, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly score; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; TEE = transesophageal echocardiography, LAAC group only

The CHA 2 DS 2 Vasc score, HASBLED score and BARC classification, can be found in Online Table 1 3.

Patients allocated to the intervention group receive percutaneous catheter-based closure of the LAA one of the currently available CE-mark LAA closure devices with reported efficacy and safety data of at least 500 patients (initially WATCHMAN™ LAA System or the successor device WATCHMAN FLX™ [Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA], AMPLATZER® Cardiac Plug [St. Jude Medical, Golden Valley, MN, USA] or the successor device Amplatzer Amulet). , All participating centers need to have experience with LAA closure implantations prior to participation and operators need to be certified for the LAA occlusion with the device used (at least 20 implants per device).

Postimplantation antithrombotic treatment was individualised based on the bleeding risk of the patient and decided by the treating physician ( Figure 2 ). After deployment of the LAA closure device, at least 3 months dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) should be considered by the treating physician. If there is a complete LAA occlusion or only a small residual shunt (< 5mm jet width) in the absence of device surface thrombi according to trans-esophageal echocardiography (TEE) discontinuation of DAPT should be considered. Single antiplatelet therapy with aspirin can be discontinued after 6 months unless there is a clear indication for aspirin therapy (eg, coronary artery disease). In patients with excessive bleeding risk DAPT duration can be shortened to 6 weeks and aspirin stopped at 3 months. ,, Alternatively, monotherapy with aspirin for up to 6 weeks can be provided. As CLOSURE-AF only includes patients with high bleeding risk, the limited DAPT exposure of 3 months following LAA occlusion may contribute to a reduced cumulative risk of bleeding in the LAA device group.

Figure 2

Therapy recommendations of CLOSURE-AF.

Patients eligible for long-term OAC allocated to the best medical care group should receive NOAC therapy whenever considered eligible by the treating physician. , In case of contraindications to OAC (ie, excessive bleeding risk) patients in the BMC group might receive no antithrombotic/antiplatelet therapy according to the discretion of the treating physician.

Design aspects

CLOSURE-AF is an investigator-initiated trial. The trial conducted in cooperation with the AFNET and German Stroke Society with its associated networks of more than 200 German stroke units which constitute potential screening sites for the trial and strengthens the feasibility. To maximise external validity and to enable broad enrolment, the trial has an open design with blind adjudication of outcome events. Both LAA implanting and other sites can participate in the study. The DZHK study platform further facilitates enrolment and follow-up.

Patient population

Inclusion and major exclusion criteria are shown in Table 1 . In brief, patients need to be eligible for both management strategies and be able to consent. Key exclusion criteria are limited to study medication safety/intolerance and end stage kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <15 ml/min/1.73m 2 or dialysis treatment), in line with a pragmatic trial. The trial enrolled patients in 46 clinical cardiology departments in Germany.

Table 1

Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the CLOSURE AF trial.

Inclusion criteria
• Signed written informed consent 28.02.2018- present
• Documented atrial fibrillation (paroxysmal, persistent, long-standing persistent or permanent) 28.02.2018- present
• CHA2DS2VASc-Score ≥2 28.02.2018- present
• High risk of bleeding under oral anticoagulation or contraindication for (N)OAC therapy, in particular patients with at least one of the following conditions: 28.02.2018- present
∘ HAS-BLED-score ≥3 28.02.2018- present
∘ Prior intracranial/intraspinal bleed, intraocular bleed compromising vision (BARC: type 3c) 23.11.2018- present
∘ Prior intracranial/intraspinal bleed (BARC: type 3c) 28.02.2018- 23.11.2018
  • Hemorrhagic/bleeding complication fulfilling BARC type 3a or 3b: gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary tract or respiratory tract bleeding, where the patient is considered to be at a persistently increased risk of bleeding, eg, the cause of bleeding cannot be successfully eliminated

28.02.2018- present
∘ Chronic kidney disease with eGFR 15-29 ml/min/1.73m2 23.11.2018- present
∘ Chronic kidney disease with eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73m2 28.02.2018- 23.11.2018
∘ Any recurrent bleeding making chronic anticoagulation not feasible 23.11.2018- present
• Subject eligible for an LAA occluder device 28.02.2018- present
• Age ≥18 years 28.02.2018- present
• Willing and capable of providing informed consent, participating in all associated study activities 28.02.2018- present
• negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test (no longer than 48 hours prior to randomization in outpatients or not older than 14 days in continuously hospitalized patients without signs of COVID-19 infection) or negative SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test (no longer than 24 hours prior to randomization) 14.06.2023- present
• negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test (no longer than 48 hours prior to randomization in outpatients or not older than 14 days in continuously hospitalized patients without signs of COVID-19 infection) 208.10.2020– 14.06.2023
Exclusion Criteria
• Absolute contraindication to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) 28.02.2018- present
• Comorbidities other than AF requiring chronic (N)OAC therapy, eg, mechanical heart valve prosthesis 28.02.2018- present
• Symptomatic carotid disease (if not treated) 28.02.2018- present
• Complex aortic atheroma with mobile plaque (Kronzon classification grade V) 28.02.2018- present
• Heart transplant 28.02.2018- present
• Active infection or symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 infection or active endocarditis or other infections producing bacteremia 08.10.2020- present
• Active infection or active endocarditis or other infections producing bacteremia 28.02.2018- 08.10.2020
• Cardiac tumor 28.02.2018- present
• Severe liver failure (Child–Pugh class C or liver failure with coagulopathy) 28.02.2018- present
• Severe renal failure (GFR <15 ml/min/1.73m2 or current requirement for dialysis (defined as current, regular renal replacement therapy performed at least weekly (including hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis) within the last 30 days)) 12.02.2020– present
• Severe renal failure (GFR <15 ml/min/1.73m2) 28.02.2018– 12.02.2020
• Pregnancy or breastfeeding 28.02.2018- present
• For female patients of reproductive potential: Unwilling to agree to use a highly effective method of contraception (Pearl index <1) throughout the study period (please see 5.2.1) 28.02.2018- present
• Subject with participation in another interventional clinical trial during this trial or within 30 days before entry into this trial. 28.02.2018- present
• Known terminating disease with life expectancy <1 year (including those with end-stage heart failure) 28.02.2018- present
• Subjects, who are committed to an institution due to binding official or court order 28.02.2018- present
• Subject who is dependent on the Site, the Site Investigator, any sub-investigator, his/her representative and/or the sponsor 28.02.2018- present
• persons who are not proficient in the German language 28.02.2018- present
• Unstable/not fully recompensated acute heart failure corresponding to NYHA class III and/or IV 12.02.2020- present
• Acute heart failure within the last 30 days 23.11.2018- 12.02.2020
• Cardiac intervention within the last 30 days. Subjects with planned cardiac or non-cardiac surgery or intervention. (These subjects can be included 30 days after such intervention/surgery. 23.11.2018– 12.02.2020
• Subjects with known antiphospholipid syndrome 12.02.2020- present

BARC, bleeding academic research consortium.

The open design facilitates broad enrolment, potentially reducing selection bias inherent to double-blind studies.

Study endpoints

In order to generate clinically important data, a patient‐relevant composite primary endpoint of „net clinical benefit” was constructed and used as the primary outcome ( Table 2 ). The outcome includes events that have a demonstrable impact on patients´ lives, namely stroke (both ischemic and hemorrhagic), cardiovascular or unexplained death and major bleeding events ( 3 according to the BARC classification). Comparable endpoints have been used in previous LAA closure studies. , All components of the combined clinical endpoint will be adjudicated by an independent clinical endpoint committee (CEC), blinded to the patient’s assigned treatment group, as required by the PROBE design. The composite primary endpoint has direct implications on patients’ morbidity and mortality and also a significant economic impact. Efficacy and safety will be studied as secondary endpoints.

Table 2

Primary, secondary and safety outcomes of the CLOSURE-AF trial.

Primary endpoint
(“net clinical benefit”)
Secondary endpoints Safety endpoints
Survival time free of
– Stroke including ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke
– Systemic embolism
– Major bleeding (BARC type 3‐5)
– Cardiovascular or unexplained death
-Primary endpoint events per year (assessed by the number of primary endpoint events during the follow-up period)
– Combined endpoint: MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, ie stroke/systemic embolism/cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction)
– Mortality (including all-cause death, cardiovascular death, non‐cardiovascular death, peri‐procedural death)
– Major bleeding (BARC type 3‐5)
– Systemic embolism (assessed by the rate of systemic embolism during the follow-up period)
– Ischemic stroke
– Hemorrhagic stroke
– Stroke of any origin
– Ischemic stroke and systemic embolism
– Hemorrhagic stroke and systemic embolism
– Stroke of any origin and systemic embolism
– Cardiovascular or unexplained death
– Transient ischemic attack (TIA; defined as neurological deficit of vascular origin lasting ≤ 24 hours without corresponding brain lesion)
– Myocardial infarction
– Hospitalization for bleeding or cardiovascular event
– Changes from baseline in cognitive function assessed by MoCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) at 24 months
– Changes from baseline in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) at 24 months (Index and Visual analog scale)
– Change from baseline in modified Rankin Score (mRS) at 3 and 24 months
– Device-related complications until day 7 or discharge
∘ Device-related thrombus
∘ Pericardial effusion
∘ Leaks
– Pericardial tamponade procedure-related death
– Technical and procedural success of device implantation
∘ Device success (device deployed and implanted in correct position)
∘ Technical success (device implanted in correct position with a peri-device leak ≤5mm and no device-related complications until day 30)
∘ Leak <3mm
∘ Procedural success (technical success with no procedure-related complications)
∘ Peri-procedural outcomes at 7 or discharge and 30 calendar days after implantation:
∘ Pericardial tamponade
• Treated with pericardiocentesis
• Treated surgically
• Resulted in death
∘ Pericardial effusion, no intervention
∘ Major bleeding requiring transfusion (BARC 3-5) (additionally split up into: procedural bleedings within first 7 days and nonprocedural bleedings afterwards until 30 days)
∘ Pulmonary embolism
∘ Air embolism
∘ Device embolization
• Removed percutaneously
• Removed surgically
∘ Procedure-related stroke/TIA
∘ Peripheral embolism
∘ Systemic infection
∘ Additional mortality within 7 and 30 days
Additionally the total number of serious adverse events (SAEs) will be analysed.
Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Jun 27, 2026 | Posted by in CARDIOLOGY | Comments Off on Catheter-based left atrial appendage CLOSURE in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke and bleeding as compared to best medical therapy: Rationale and design of the prospective randomized CLOSURE-AF trial

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access