The WATCHMAN left atrial appendage closure device for patients with atrial fibrillation: current status and future perspectives

Gender‐specific outcomes after percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: A nationwide readmission database analysis

“…Our comparative analysis reported higher peri‐procedural complications rates in women, which was primarily driven by hemorrhagic complications. The study results align with the recently published National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) registry‐based study by Daren et al 10 Determining the causality of this difference becomes more pressing as pLAAC devices are now being compared to novel oral anticoagulants as a second‐line treatment for AF patients 14 …”

“…The study results align with the recently published National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) registry-based study by Daren et al 10 Determining the causality of this difference becomes more pressing as pLAAC devices are now being compared to novel oral anticoagulants as a second-line treatment for AF patients. 14 Though our study can not determine the causality, few possible explanations can be relatable. A quantitative study based on the Mayo Clinic tissue registry showed the anatomical difference in LAA between men and women.…”

Left atrial appendage exclusion in patients with atrial fibrillation: Should it become standard of care?

“…The PREVAIL, 14 PROTECT‐AF, 15 and EWOLUTION 16 trials, summarized in Table 2, all clearly show that while the Watchman is comparable or superior to Warfarin in terms of preventing systemic emboli and bleeding risk in the long term, it suffers from a perioperative complication rate of 2.8%–8.7%. A separate pitfall of the Watchman Device is that the first iterations of the device were not always suitable for every anatomic variation of the LAAs 17 . This is an issue that has been somewhat ameliorated in the more recent generations of the device.…”

“…A separate pitfall of the Watchman Device is that the first iterations of the device were not always suitable for every anatomic variation of the LAAs. 17 This is an issue that has been somewhat ameliorated in the more recent generations of the device.…”

Embolic Cerebrovascular Accident Secondary to Device-Related Thrombus Post WATCHMAN Device Implantation

“…However, anticoagulation comes with its own risk, as it predisposes patients to bleeding, especially intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding [ 4 ]. Since the left atrial appendage (LAA) is the main source of thrombi formation in 90% of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, another approach to stroke prevention is to physically block clots from exiting the LAA [ 5 ]. In patients with non-treatable, recurrent, or major bleeding, a left atrial appendage (LAA) occluding device or surgical LAA occlusion may be considered.…”