Search

Introduction: The Watchman-FLX left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) device presents innovative features: higher conformability, reduced length, closed distal "flex-ball" during deployment, and flattened surface. We report our real-world experience with the Watchman-FLX device in two centers with consolidated LAAC expertise., Methods: We enrolled 200 consecutive Watchman-FLX patients (2019-2021) in a nonrandomized double-center registry; procedural data and follow-up for midterm clinical outcomes were collected. A control group of 100 patients treated with first-generation Watchman (2.5) was included., Results: According to mean CHAD 2 DS 2 -VASc (5 ± 1.40) and HAS-BLED (3.8 ± 1.01) scores, the population included in this study was at high risk: 29% had a previous stroke and 56.5% a bleeding event. Main LAAC indications were symptomatic hemorrhage (39.5%), need for triple antithrombotic therapy (39%), gastrointestinal bleeding (32%), and oral anticoagulation intolerance (18%). Transesophageal echocardiography guidance was followed in 93% of cases (48% in general anesthesia and 45% under conscious sedation). Repositioning an FLX device was required in 20% of cases and no complication occurred. In 96% of patients, the first selected device was delivered, while in 4% a device size change was required after the first choice (7% with Watchman 2.5). Peridevice leaks (<5 mm) were found postimplant in two cases (1%). Overall, the procedural success rate was 99.5%. One patient's procedure was unsuccessful (0.5%), due to left atrial appendage (LAA) anatomy; differently, the mean failure rate with Watchman 2.5 was 2%. No device embolization was reported. Complications (8.5%) were mainly related to the access site (3%); major bleedings (1%), and in-hospital death (0.5%) rarely occurred. After a follow-up of 272 ± 173 days, 2.3% of cases experienced a non-device-related stroke and 0.6% fatal bleeding., Conclusion: Our registry showed a high procedural success rate of the Watchman-FLX in a high-risk population. According to our experience, the main advantages include easy implanting and repositioning, absence of embolization, good LAA sealing, and low rate of complications in the follow-up period., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Percutaneous cardiovascular interventions have changed dramatically in recent years, and the impetus given by the rapid implementation of novel techniques and devices have been mirrored by a refinement of antithrombotic strategies for secondary prevention, which have been supported by a significant burden of evidence from clinical studies. In the current manuscript, we aim to provide a comprehensive, yet pragmatic, revision of the current available evidence regarding antithrombotic strategies in the domain of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions. We revise the evidence regarding antithrombotic therapy for secondary prevention in coronary artery disease and stent implantation, the complex interrelation between antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with concomitant atrial fibrillation, and finally focus on the novel developments in the secondary prevention after structural heart disease intervention. A special focus on treatment individualization is included to emphasize risk and benefits of each therapeutic strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]