Left atrial appendage closure during mitral repair in patients without atrial fibrillation

Objective Routine left atrial appendage closure during mitral repair in patients without atrial fibrillation (AF) is controversial. We aimed to compare the incidence of stroke after mitral repair in patients without recent AF according to left atrial appendage closure. Methods An institutional registry identified 764 consecutive patients without recent AF, endocarditis, prior appendage closure, or stroke undergoing isolated robotic mitral repair between 2005 and 2020. Left atrial appendages were closed via left atriotomy using a double-layer continuous suture in 5.3% (15 out of 284) patients before 2014, versus 86.7% (416 out of 480) after 2014. The cumulative incidence of stroke (including transient ischemic attack) was determined using statewide hospital data. Median follow-up was 4.5 years (range, 0-16.6 years). Results Patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure were older (63 vs 57.5 years, P < .001), with higher prevalence of remote AF requiring cryomaze (9%, n = 40 vs 1%, n = 3, P < .001). After appendage closure there were fewer reoperations for bleeding (0.7% [n = 3] vs 3% [n = 10]; P = .02), and more AF (31.8% [n = 137] vs 25.2% [n = 84]; P = .047). Two-year freedom from >2+ mitral regurgitation was 97%. Six strokes and 1 transient ischemic attack occurred after appendage closure compared with 14 and 5 in patients without (P = .002), associated with a significant difference in 8-year cumulative incidence of stroke/transient ischemic attack (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.14-0.85; P = .02). This difference persisted in the sensitivity analysis, excluding patients undergoing concomitant cryomaze procedures. Conclusions Routine left atrial appendage closure during mitral repair in patients without recent AF appears safe and was associated with a lower risk of subsequent stroke/transient ischemic attack.