Skip to content
Review

Vascular Closure Devices Versus Standard Care in Patients Who Underwent Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jul 2026 · Journal of Surgical Research · Vol 326, pp. 486-494 · 0 citations · 14 references
Medicine

TL;DR

In patients with AF undergoing ablation, VCDs achieve homeostasis more rapidly than SC, with no significant difference observed between the two groups in terms of time to discharge, minor vascular complications, and same-day discharge.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The adoption of vascular closure devices (VCDs) has gained prominence as an alternative to standard care (SC) for patients undergoing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Although VCDs present potential benefits, there are ongoing concerns related to the duration required for hemostasis, the time until patient discharge, and the incidence of vascular complications. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcomes associated with VCDs compared to SC.

Methods

We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, comparing VCD with SC in patients who underwent AF ablation. Statistical analyses were performed using R 4.0.0. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2. We pooled the mean difference (MD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. The main continuous outcomes of interest included the time to hemostasis, the time until discharge, and the occurrence of minor vascular complications.

Results

A total of two RCTs and five cohort studies involving 30,560 patients were included. Of these, 15,343 (50%) received treatment with VCDs, and 15,217 (49.7%) received SC. The follow-up period varied from 1 wk to 3 mo. Patient ages varied from 58 to 66 y on average. VCDs had a shorter time to hemostasis than SC (MD = -5.63 min; 95% CI -7.30 to -3.95; P < 0.01; I2 = 99%). There was no difference in the two groups regarding time until discharge (MD = -10.68 h; 95% CI -21.98 to 0.63; P = 0.06; I2 = 100%). No statistical difference was found in the OR for minor vascular complications (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.29-3.13; P = 0.941; I2 = 55%) and same-day discharge (OR 4.37, 95% CI 0.69-27.76; P = 0.118; I2 = 81%) between the two groups.

Conclusions

In patients with AF undergoing ablation, VCDs achieve homeostasis more rapidly than SC, with no significant difference observed between the two groups in terms of time to discharge, minor vascular complications, and same-day discharge.

View source

Similar papers

Review Aug 2026

Catheter-Based Left Atrial Appendage Closure vs Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the gold standard for preventing ischemic stroke, at the expense of a higher risk of bleeding. Catheter-based left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been proposed as an alternative strategy to prevent stroke, but the efficacy and safe...

C. Laudani, K. Bujak, D. Giacoppo et al. · 1 citation
Oct 2026

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Meta-Analysis of RCTs Using Reconstructed Individual Patient Data.

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a reasonable alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) in selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We conducted an updated meta-analysis of RCTs comparing LAAC vs. OAC in patients with AF. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of all stroke, systemic embolism, or...

Armaan Otaal, Megan Coylewright, Mohamad A. Alkhouli et al. · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, but randomized controlled trials have primarily focused on composite end points, potentially obscuring differences in individual clinical outcomes. We compared the...

Adishwar Rao, V. Ravi, M. Murthi et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

“Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials”

LAAC provides similar overall efficacy and safety compared with medical therapy for stroke prevention in AF but should currently remain reserved for selected patients rather than replacing oral anticoagulation broadly, indicating current evidence remains underpowered and additional randomized trials are needed.

A. AL-Janabi, A. Al-shammari, A. Hageen et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Efficacy and safety of concomitant catheter ablation and left atrial appendage closure compared to catheter ablation only - a meta-analysis.

Combined CA + LAAC was associated with significantly higher arrhythmia recurrence than CA-only, potentially attributable to limited substrate modification in the one-stop setting.

Isabel Rattka, Christine M. Poch, Tabea Deichsel et al. · 1 citation

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.