Clinical Outcomes and Postprocedural Antithrombotic Management After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients with...

Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and a history of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding represent a particularly challenging clinical population due to the coexistence of elevated thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risks. Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative strategy for stroke prevention in patients in whom long-term oral anticoagulation is contraindicated or poorly tolerated. However, evidence specifically addressing clinical outcomes and optimal postprocedural antithrombotic management in this subgroup remains limited. Methods: A comprehensive systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL from database inception to April 2026. Studies were eligible if they included patients with prior gastrointestinal bleeding as the primary study population or reported separately extractable outcomes for a predefined gastrointestinal bleeding subgroup. The primary outcomes were recurrent GI bleeding, thromboembolic events, and all-cause mortality, while secondary outcomes included procedural success, device-related thrombosis, and postprocedural antithrombotic strategies. Owing to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity, findings were synthesized qualitatively in accordance with PRISMA 2020 recommendations. Results: Five observational studies reporting GI bleeding-specific outcomes were included in the systematic evidence synthesis. Procedural success rates were consistently high, and LAAO was associated with acceptable thromboembolic outcomes during follow-up. Nevertheless, recurrent GI bleeding remained a clinically relevant complication, particularly in patients with a prior bleeding history. Postprocedural antithrombotic regimens varied widely, ranging from short-term oral anticoagulation to dual or single antiplatelet therapy and reduced-intensity strategies. Less intensive regimens appeared feasible in carefully selected patients at very high bleeding risk; however, no universally optimal approach could be identified. Conclusions: Available observational evidence suggests that LAAO may represent a stroke prevention option in selected patients with AF and prior GI bleeding, although firm conclusions regarding net clinical benefit and the optimal postprocedural antithrombotic strategy cannot currently be drawn. Its net clinical benefit is closely linked to individualized postprocedural management, particularly the choice and intensity of antithrombotic therapy. These findings highlight the importance of a multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach and underscore the need for prospective studies to establish evidence-based treatment strategies in this high-risk population.