Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke, accounting for more than 37 million cases worldwide. In AF, the left atrial appendage (LAA) is the most common site of thrombus formation, and its ligation/closure with the WATCHMAN device is a good alternative to long-term oral anticoagulation, especially in patients with contraindications to warfarin. However, the implantation procedure is associated with various risks and complications. A short-term anticoagulant and antithrombotic administration are essential after implantation. However, no consensus has been reached on the optimal regimen. The WATCHMAN device is non-inferior to warfarin and is a safe alternative for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolization related to non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Important procedure-related complications include pericardial effusion (PE), device embolization, procedure-related ischemic stroke, and device-related thrombosis (DRT) formation. It is essential to optimize post-implantation therapy according to individual patient bleeding risk, DRT formation, and contraindication to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Recent studies have also shown that DOACs are a convenient and non-inferior substitute for warfarin. Furthermore, patients with absolute contraindications to OACs/DOACs can only be managed with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) should be used to assess residual peridevice flow and possible DRT formation at days 45 and 12 months. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and OAC are excellent choices for DRT treatment if detected. This review summarizes the most important complications of the WATCHMAN device in the existing literature and discusses various anticoagulation strategies and challenges post-implementation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10593162PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.55729/2000-9666.1183DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

watchman device
16
drt formation
12
atrial fibrillation
8
ischemic stroke
8
watchman
4
device review
4
review era
4
stroke
4
era stroke
4
stroke prophylaxis
4

Similar Publications

Background: The optimal imaging modality for selecting the device size in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing one-stop left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with concomitant pulmonary vein isolation (PVi) remains undefined. We compared preprocedural 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) with intra-procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and left atrial appendage (LAA) angiography in guiding one-stage PVi and LAAO.

Methods: We measured the LAA ostium diameter using an interactive 3D CT system with a central line-based approach and compared these measurements with those from intra-procedural TEE and angiography, and the actual device size.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Although the method of autocalibration or calibration based on catheter diameters was proposed for fluoroscopic measurement during percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO), it may be imprecise and lead to mismeasurement. We sought to investigate whether the utilization of the surface steel ball calibration (SSBC) method under fluoroscopy could facilitate the fluoroscopic measurement of the post-implanted WATCHMAN device (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, MA, USA) in LAAO.

Methods: This retrospective study included 97 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous LAAO with the WATCHMAN device.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Historically, percutaneous transcatheter left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been performed under general anesthesia (GA) with transesophageal echocardiographic images obtained by a noninvasive cardiologist and usually requires an overnight hospital stay. Alternatively, we present our single-center experience performing LAACs under deep sedation (DS), employing an echocardiographic technician instead of a noninvasive cardiologist, and expediting same-day discharge. Mid- to long-term outcomes were also evaluated with follow-up imaging at a 45-day visit.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

WATCHMAN versus LACbes® device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: a single-center, propensity-matched study.

BMC Cardiovasc Disord

January 2025

Department of Cardiology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, No. 168 Changhai Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, 200433, China.

Background: Different left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices have been introduced into the clinical setting. A new dual-seal mechanism LACbes® occluder with isogenous barbs for LAAC has been designed to facilitate easier delivery and improve safety. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the WATCHMAN with those of the LACbes® device for LAAC.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) to avoid oral anticoagulants, but issues like incomplete device endothelialization (IDE) can lead to complications.
  • A study compared the endothelialization rates after implantation of two devices: the Watchman plug and the LACBES occluder, in 201 patients, using cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA).
  • Results showed that the LACBES occluder had a higher IDE rate at both 3 and 6 months compared to the Watchman device, indicating that it takes longer for the LACBES to achieve complete endothelialization after LAAC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!