ArticleAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease2026
Outcomes of Watchman device implantation in atrial fibrillation patients contraindicated for long-term anticoagulation: a single-center experience.
Article in American journal of cardiovascular disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) using the Watchman device is an established strategy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at high thromboembolic risk who cannot tolerate long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC).
objectivesTo evaluate short-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of Watchman implantation in AF patients with contraindications to long-term OAC.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective single-center study of AF patients who underwent Watchman implantation between September 01, 2023, and March 01, 2025. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, procedural characteristics, complications, antithrombotic strategies, and 45-day outcomes were analyzed. Outcomes were compared between patients with and without follow-up TEE. Data were analyzed using SAS v9.4. All tests were two-tailed, and a
resultsAmong 10,078 AF patients, 120 underwent Watchman implantation; 105 met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 75.8±7.8 years, and 46.7% were female. Implant success was 100%. Pericardial effusion occurred in 11 patients (10.5%, 95% CI 5.4-18.0%), including tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis in 2 patients (1.9%). Vascular access complications occurred in 3 patients (2.9%, 95% CI 0.6-8.1%). No device embolizations, device-related thrombi, or periprocedural strokes were observed. Most patients (88.5%) were discharged on dual antiplatelet therapy, while 3.8% received single antiplatelet therapy. At 45 days, 89 patients (84.8%) completed TEE; device position was stable in all. One patient (1.1%, 95% CI 0.03-6.1%) had a significant peridevice leak (>5 mm), and none had device-related thrombus. Clinical outcomes included one hemorrhagic stroke (1.1%) and eight rehospitalizations (7.6%, 95% CI 3.4-14.5%), unrelated to the device. No ischemic strokes were observed.
conclusionWatchman implantation achieved a 100% success rate with low complication rates and favorable short-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes in AF patients contraindicated for long-term anticoagulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.