Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Circulation Cardiova...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions
Article . 2016 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Left Atrial Appendage and Closure

Who, When, and How
Authors: David R, Holmes; Vivek Y, Reddy;

Left Atrial Appendage and Closure

Abstract

Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation have a 4- to 5-fold increase in strokes and that rhythm may be responsible for 15% to 20% of all strokes, particularly in the elderly. In this setting, thrombus in the left atrial appendage has been found to be the source of stroke in 90% of cases. Although oral anticoagulants have been found effective in reducing stroke rates, for a variety of issues, they may only be used in 40% to 50% of patients at increased risk for stroke. Given pathophysiology of stroke, site-specific therapy directed at left atrial appendage occlusion has been now studied for stroke prevention, and one device is FDA approved (Watchman). A meta-analysis of 2 randomized clinical trials and 2 registries with this device documented the following: (1) patients receiving the device had significantly fewer hemorrhagic strokes (hazard ratio 0.22, P =0.004); (2) a significant reduction in cardiovascular or unexplained death (hazard ratio 0.48, P =0.004); (3) more ischemic strokes in the device group; however, when periprocedural events were excluded, the difference was not significant; and (4) a significant reduction in nonprocedural bleeding with the device (hazard ratio 0.51, P =0.006) versus control. At present, the only device approved in the United States is indicated in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with acceptable anatomy who are at increased risk for stroke and would be candidates for anticoagulation in whom there is concern about the risk/benefit ratio for chronic anticoagulation. Unresolved issues include optimal patient selection criteria, the role of devices in patients in whom anticoagulation is contraindicated, and the relative role of novel oral anticoagulants versus the device which has not been tested in randomized trials.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Risk, Anticoagulants, United States, Stroke, Equipment and Supplies, Atrial Fibrillation, Device Approval, Humans, Atrial Appendage, Heart Atria, Aged, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    31
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
31
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
bronze