← Back
NeuroTrials.ai
Neurology Clinical Trial Database

CLOSURE-AF

Left Atrial Appendage Closure or Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation

Year of Publication: 2026

Authors: U. Landmesser, C. Skurk, P. Kirchhof, ..., for the CLOSURE-AF Trial Investigators

Journal: The New England Journal of Medicine

Citation: N Engl J Med 2026. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2513310.

Link: https://www.nejm.org/doi/abs/10.1056/NEJMoa2408308

PDF: https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2408308


Clinical Question

In AF patients at high risk for both stroke and bleeding, is catheter-based LAA closure noninferior to physician-directed best medical care (predominantly DOACs) for a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, or cardiovascular/unexplained death?

Bottom Line

LAA closure was NOT noninferior to best medical care (predominantly DOACs) in high-risk AF patients: composite endpoint 16.8 vs 13.3 per 100 patient-years (RMST difference -0.36 years; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.01; P=0.44 for noninferiority). Stroke rates were similar (2.6 vs 2.7/100 pt-yr), but LAA closure had more major bleeding (7.4 vs 6.2/100 pt-yr) driven by periprocedural events (52 procedure-related bleeds). First large RCT comparing LAA closure vs DOAC-dominant control.

Major Points

  • FAILED noninferiority: composite 16.8 vs 13.3/100 pt-yr (RMST diff -0.36 yr; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.01; P=0.44 for NI).
  • Stroke rates similar: 2.6 vs 2.7/100 pt-yr (27 events each group) — device provides comparable stroke prevention.
  • Major bleeding was NOT reduced with device: 70 events (7.4/100 pt-yr) vs 61 (6.2/100 pt-yr). Of the 70 device-group bleeds, 18 were procedure-related and 52 were NON-procedure-related; the 18 periprocedural events offset any long-term bleeding reduction.
  • Very high-risk cohort: mean age 78, CHA2DS2-VASc 5.2, HAS-BLED 3.0. Prior major bleeding in 30.4%. Stage IV CKD in 24.1%.
  • First RCT vs DOAC-dominant control: 85.1% of medical group on DOACs (prior trials PROTECT-AF/PREVAIL compared vs warfarin).
  • Periprocedural complications within 7 days post-implant occurred in 5.7% of patients. Table 3 breakdown: 5 pericardial tamponades (4 treated with pericardiocentesis, 1 surgically), 18 major bleeding events requiring transfusion, 1 device embolization requiring surgical removal, 1 procedure-related TIA, 1 peripheral embolism, and 2 deaths within 7 days of implantation.
  • Procedural success 96.4%. Device success 98.3% (414/421). Watchman 54.3%, Amplatzer 41.8%, LAmbre 3.9%.
  • CV/unexplained death numerically higher with device: 9.5 vs 7.7/100 pt-yr (RMST -0.19; 95% CI -0.50 to 0.11).
  • Sample size was reduced twice via prespecified blinded interim analyses and emerging data from similar trials: 912 patients enrolled vs 1,586 originally planned; 282 primary events observed vs 467 needed at 80% power. Recruitment was halted because interim data suggested possible overpowering, not for efficacy/safety concerns.
  • Key implication: in DOAC era, LAA closure does not offer a net clinical benefit over medical therapy, even in high-bleeding-risk patients.
  • Despite NI failure on the primary composite, device-group patients had SIGNIFICANTLY MORE hospitalizations for bleeding or CV events (53.0 vs 39.4 per 100 pt-yr; RMST difference -0.44 years, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.09). This reinforces that LAA closure does not reduce cardiovascular burden in this high-risk population.

Design

Study Type: Pragmatic, prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial with blinded outcome adjudication (PROBE design)

Randomization: 1

Blinding: Open-label; blinded outcome adjudication by independent clinical events committee. 1:1, stratified by site.

Enrollment Period: March 2018 to May 2024

Follow-up Duration: Median 3.0 years (IQR 1.7-4.7); maximum 6.7 years.

Centers: 42

Countries: Germany

Sample Size: 888

Analysis: Intention-to-treat. Noninferiority design (HR margin 1.3). Cox model with RMST due to non-proportional hazards. Planned 1,586, enrolled 912.

Registration: NCT03463317


Inclusion Criteria

  • Adult with AF (paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent).
  • CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2.
  • High bleeding risk: at least one of: HAS-BLED ≥3, prior intracranial/intraspinal/intraocular bleeding, prior BARC 3a/3b hemorrhage, Stage IV CKD (eGFR 15-29), recurrent bleeding precluding long-term anticoagulation.
  • OR contraindications to long-term anticoagulation.

Exclusion Criteria

  • Detailed criteria in Supplementary Table S4 (not enumerated in main manuscript).

Baseline Characteristics

CharacteristicLAA Closure (N=446)Medical Therapy (N=442)
Age (mean±SD)78.5±6.877.3±7.3
Female172 (38.6%)171 (38.7%)
White415 (93.0%)416 (94.1%)
CHA2DS2-VASc (mean±SD)5.2±1.55.1±1.6
HAS-BLED (mean±SD)3.1±0.93.0±0.9
Hypertension417 (93.5%)417 (94.3%)
Diabetes175 (39.2%)186 (42.1%)
CAD257/441 (58.3%)232/439 (52.8%)
Prior stroke/TIA142/445 (31.9%)151/442 (34.2%)
Prior BARC 3a/3b bleeding132 (29.6%)138 (31.2%)
Prior BARC 3c bleeding56 (12.6%)53 (12.0%)
Stage IV CKD114 (25.6%)100 (22.6%)
Cardiomyopathy78/439 (17.8%)75/438 (17.1%)
Post-implant antithromboticDAPT ≥3 months (79.6%)
DOAC376 (85.1%)
No antithrombotics33 (7.5%)

Arms

FieldLAA ClosureControl
InterventionCatheter-based LAA closure: Watchman/FLX (54.3%), Amplatzer/Amulet (41.8%), LAmbre (3.9%). Attempted in 421/446 (94.4%). Post-implant: DAPT ≥3 months, then aspirin until 6 months. High-bleed-risk: DAPT 6 weeks, aspirin 3 months.Physician-directed: 85.1% DOAC, 3.2% VKA, 1.6% single antiplatelet, 0.7% DAPT, 7.5% no antithrombotics. DOAC as default for anticoagulation-eligible. 18 patients (4.1%) crossed to LAA closure.
DurationSingle procedure + median 3.0 years follow-upMedian 3.0 years

Outcomes

OutcomeTypeControlInterventionHR / OR / RRP-value
Composite: stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding (BARC ≥3), or CV/unexplained deathPrimary127 events; 13.3/100 pt-yr155 events; 16.8/100 pt-yr0.44 for noninferiority (FAILED)
Ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke | 95% CI: -0.17 to 0.20Secondary27; 2.7/100 pt-yr27; 2.6/100 pt-yrRMST 0.01
Ischemic strokeSecondary15; 1.5/100 pt-yr18; 1.8/100 pt-yr
Hemorrhagic strokeSecondary13; 1.3/100 pt-yr10; 1.0/100 pt-yr
Major bleeding | 95% CI: -0.40 to 0.15Secondary61; 6.2/100 pt-yr70; 7.4/100 pt-yrRMST -0.12
CV/unexplained death | 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.11Secondary81; 7.7/100 pt-yr99; 9.5/100 pt-yrRMST -0.19
All-cause death | 95% CI: -0.48 to 0.21Secondary141; 13.5/100 pt-yr155; 14.8/100 pt-yrRMST -0.13
Systemic embolismSecondary1; 0.1/100 pt-yr3; 0.3/100 pt-yr
MISecondary20; 2.0/100 pt-yr14; 1.4/100 pt-yr
Transient ischemic attack at 90 daysSecondary10/1028.6 (1.0/100 pt-yr)9/1029.1 (0.9/100 pt-yr)
Stroke or systemic embolism compositeSecondary28/1015.0 (2.8/100 pt-yr)29/1016.5 (2.9/100 pt-yr)
Hospitalization for bleeding or cardiovascular eventSecondary250/633.9 (39.4/100 pt-yr)284/535.9 (53.0/100 pt-yr)
Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE)Secondary81/988.6 (8.2/100 pt-yr)92/988.3 (9.3/100 pt-yr)
Periprocedural complications (≤7 days)Adverse24/421 (5.7%)
Pericardial tamponadeAdverse5 (4 pericardiocentesis, 1 surgical)
Periprocedural major bleed (transfusion)Adverse18
Device embolizationAdverse1 (surgical removal)
Procedure-related death (≤7 days)Adverse2
Procedure-related TIAAdverse1
Total procedure-related major bleedingAdverse52 patients
SAEsAdverse342 (77.4%)368 (82.5%)

Subgroup Analysis

Prespecified subgroups in Supplementary Figures S5-S6. Main text states results 'appeared consistent with primary analysis.' Details in supplement.


Criticisms

  • FAILED noninferiority — confidence interval did not cross zero in favor of device.
  • Sample size reduced twice based on prespecified blinded interim analyses and pooled data from similar trials: original plan 1,586 patients for 467 primary events at 80% power, but recruitment was stopped after 912 were enrolled because interim data suggested the trial might already be overpowered. Observed 282 events; failure of noninferiority could reflect either a true negative result or a power shortfall given the sample size reduction.
  • Germany only (93.6% White) — limited generalizability.
  • Open-label — clinical events committee could not be blinded to procedural complications.
  • Periprocedural bleeding (18 events in the device group) drove the lack of bleeding reduction — 52 additional device-group bleeds were non-procedural. The device's long-term bleeding benefit may improve with operator experience and refined peri-implant antithrombotic strategies.
  • More lost to follow-up in medical group (5.2% vs 2.2%); more withdrawals in device group (12.6% vs 10.9%).
  • 18 crossovers from medical to LAA closure.
  • Only Watchman and Amplatzer devices — newer devices may perform differently.
  • High event rate in medical group (13.3/100 pt-yr) reflects genuinely high-risk population.
  • Early termination after LAAOS III publication reduced sample size.
  • Per-protocol sensitivity analysis confirmed the primary result (RMST -0.40 years, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.04) — also failed noninferiority.

Funding

German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK) — public grant. Coordinated by Charité University Medicine Berlin.

Based on: CLOSURE-AF (The New England Journal of Medicine, 2026)

Authors: U. Landmesser, C. Skurk, P. Kirchhof, ..., for the CLOSURE-AF Trial Investigators

Citation: N Engl J Med 2026. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2513310.

Content summarized and formatted by NeuroTrials.ai.