Transition from WATCHMAN generation‐2.5 device to WATCHMAN FLX device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: Incidence and predictors of device‐related thrombosis and short‐ to mid‐term outcomes

Ryuki Chatani; Shunsuke Kubo; Hiroshi Tasaka; Naoki Nishiura; Kazunori Mushiake; Sachiyo Ono; Takeshi Maruo; Kazushige Kadota

doi:10.1002/ccd.31111

June 19, 2024Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

Transition from WATCHMAN generation‐2.5 device to WATCHMAN FLX device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: Incidence and predictors of device‐related thrombosis and short‐ to mid‐term outcomes

View at Publisher

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Abstract

Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) not suitable for long-term anticoagulant therapy undergo percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) using the WATCHMAN device. The safety and efficacy of WATCHMAN-FLX (WM-FLX) compared with WATCHMAN-2.5 (WM-2.5), particularly in Asian populations, is unknown.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Chatani et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e6417fb6db6435875d2dcd https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31111

View at Publisher

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Transition from WATCHMAN generation‐2.5 device to WATCHMAN FLX device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: Incidence and predictors of device‐related thrombosis and short‐ to mid‐term outcomes

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Transition from WATCHMAN generation‐2.5 device to WATCHMAN FLX device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: Incidence and predictors of device‐related thrombosis and short‐ to mid‐term outcomes

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

More related papers

More from Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

Keep reading

More related papers

More from Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions