Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 522

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implant success and safety of left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device: peri-procedural outcomes from the EWOLUTION registry

Open access
Boersma, Lucas V.A., Schmidt, Boris, Betts, Timothy R., Sievert, Horst, Tamburino, Corrado, Teiger, Emmanuel, Pokushalov, Evgeny, Kische, Stephan, Schmitz, Thomas, Stein, Kenneth M., Bergmann, Martin W.·2016·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Left atrial appendage closure is a non-pharmacological alternative for stroke prevention in high-risk patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The objective of the multicentre EWOLUTION registry was to obtain clinical data on procedural success and complications, and long-term patient outcomes, including bleeding and incidence of stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Here, we report on the peri-procedural outcomes of up to 30 days. METHODS AND RESULTS: Baseline/implant data are available for 1021 subjects. Subjects in the study were at high risk of stroke (average CHADS2 score: 2.8 ± 1.3, CHA2DS2-VASc: 4.5 ± 1.6) and moderate-to-high risk of bleeding (average HAS-BLED score: 2.3 ± 1.2). Almost half of the subjects (45.4%) had a history of TIA, ischaemic stroke, or haemorrhagic stroke; 62% of patients were deemed unsuitable for novel oral anticoagulant by their physician. The device was successfully deployed in 98.5% of patients with no flow or minimal residual flow achieved in 99.3% of implanted patients. Twenty-eight subjects experienced 31 serious adverse events (SAEs) within 1 day of the procedure. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 0.7%. The most common SAE occurring within 30 days of the procedure was major bleeding requiring transfusion. Incidence of SAEs within 30 days was significantly lower for subjects deemed to be ineligible for oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) compared with those eligible for OAT (6.5 vs. 10.2%, P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device has a high success rate in complete LAAC with low peri-procedural risk, even in a population with a higher risk of stroke and bleeding, and multiple co-morbidities. Improvement in implantation techniques has led to a reduction of peri-procedural complications previously limiting the net clinical benefit of the procedure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv730

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 522

Metadata

Authors
Boersma, L. V. A., Schmidt, B., Betts, T. R., Sievert, H., Tamburino, C., Teiger, E., Pokushalov, E., Kische, S., Schmitz, T., Stein, K. M., & Bergmann, M. W.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2016-01-27
Volume
37
Issue
31
Pages
2465-2474
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2278350753
Cited by
522
References
20
FWCI
54.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implant success and safety of left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device: peri-procedural outcomes from the EWOLUTION registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv730
The paper
Boersma, L. V. A., Schmidt, B., Betts, T. R., Sievert, H., Tamburino, C., Teiger, E., Pokushalov, E., Kische, S., Schmitz, T., Stein, K. M., & Bergmann, M. W. (2016). Implant success and safety of left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device: peri-procedural outcomes from the EWOLUTION registry. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv730

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.