Why the study?
Structural heart interventions are increasing worldwide, making optimal secondary prevention of device thrombosis important, yet most current recommendations remain empiric.
This review summarizes current evidence and provides a practical algorithm for managing device thrombosis in nonaortic structural heart interventions.
Risk factor algorithm may guide antithrombotic choices after structural interventions; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
As the number of, and the indications for, structural heart interventions are increasing worldwide, the optimal secondary prevention to reduce device thrombosis is becoming more important. To date, most of the recommendations are empiric. The current review discusses mechanisms behind device-related thrombosis, the available evidence with regard to antithrombotic regimen after cardiac device implantation, as well as providing an algorithm for identification of risk factors for device thrombogenicity and for management of device thrombosis after implantation of patent foramen ovale and left atrial appendage occluders, MitraClips/transcatheter mitral valve replacement, pacemaker leads, and left ventricular assist devices. Of note, the topic of antithrombotic therapy and thrombogenicity of prostheses in aortic position (transcatheter aortic valve replacement, surgical, mechanical, and bioprostheses) is not part of the present article and is discussed in detail in other contemporary focused articles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geisler et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: