| . | Study cohort . |
|---|---|
| n = 244 . | |
| Days since LAAC, median (IQR) | 55.0 (48.0, 68.5) |
| Size of implanted device, mean (SD) | 27.5 (4.1) |
| Device compression, mean (SD) | 0.1 (0.1) |
| Peridevice leak | 48 (19.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency | 77 (31.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency without visible PDL | 28 (11.5%) |
| Mid-device gap area, mm2, median (IQR) | 42.5 (26.0–97.0) |
| HAT morphology | |
| ȃNo HAT | 88 (36.1%) |
| ȃSubfabric | 59 (24.2%) |
| ȃFlat sessile | 78 (32.0%) |
| ȃProtruding sessile | 17 (7.0%) |
| ȃPedunculated | 2 (0.8%) |
| Device lobe morphology | |
| ȃMarshmallow | 156 (63.9%) |
| ȃHot dog | 20 (8.2%) |
| ȃBell | 68 (27.9%) |
| Discharge antithrombotic therapy | |
| Aspirin monotherapy | 80 (32.8%) |
| Clopidogrel monotherapy | 1 (0.4%) |
| Dual antiplatelet therapy | 159 (65.2%) |
| Other therapies | 1 (0.4%) |
| No antithrombotic therapy | 3 (1.2%) |
| . | Study cohort . |
|---|---|
| n = 244 . | |
| Days since LAAC, median (IQR) | 55.0 (48.0, 68.5) |
| Size of implanted device, mean (SD) | 27.5 (4.1) |
| Device compression, mean (SD) | 0.1 (0.1) |
| Peridevice leak | 48 (19.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency | 77 (31.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency without visible PDL | 28 (11.5%) |
| Mid-device gap area, mm2, median (IQR) | 42.5 (26.0–97.0) |
| HAT morphology | |
| ȃNo HAT | 88 (36.1%) |
| ȃSubfabric | 59 (24.2%) |
| ȃFlat sessile | 78 (32.0%) |
| ȃProtruding sessile | 17 (7.0%) |
| ȃPedunculated | 2 (0.8%) |
| Device lobe morphology | |
| ȃMarshmallow | 156 (63.9%) |
| ȃHot dog | 20 (8.2%) |
| ȃBell | 68 (27.9%) |
| Discharge antithrombotic therapy | |
| Aspirin monotherapy | 80 (32.8%) |
| Clopidogrel monotherapy | 1 (0.4%) |
| Dual antiplatelet therapy | 159 (65.2%) |
| Other therapies | 1 (0.4%) |
| No antithrombotic therapy | 3 (1.2%) |
Data are presented as mean (±SD), median (IQR) or numbers (%).
| . | Study cohort . |
|---|---|
| n = 244 . | |
| Days since LAAC, median (IQR) | 55.0 (48.0, 68.5) |
| Size of implanted device, mean (SD) | 27.5 (4.1) |
| Device compression, mean (SD) | 0.1 (0.1) |
| Peridevice leak | 48 (19.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency | 77 (31.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency without visible PDL | 28 (11.5%) |
| Mid-device gap area, mm2, median (IQR) | 42.5 (26.0–97.0) |
| HAT morphology | |
| ȃNo HAT | 88 (36.1%) |
| ȃSubfabric | 59 (24.2%) |
| ȃFlat sessile | 78 (32.0%) |
| ȃProtruding sessile | 17 (7.0%) |
| ȃPedunculated | 2 (0.8%) |
| Device lobe morphology | |
| ȃMarshmallow | 156 (63.9%) |
| ȃHot dog | 20 (8.2%) |
| ȃBell | 68 (27.9%) |
| Discharge antithrombotic therapy | |
| Aspirin monotherapy | 80 (32.8%) |
| Clopidogrel monotherapy | 1 (0.4%) |
| Dual antiplatelet therapy | 159 (65.2%) |
| Other therapies | 1 (0.4%) |
| No antithrombotic therapy | 3 (1.2%) |
| . | Study cohort . |
|---|---|
| n = 244 . | |
| Days since LAAC, median (IQR) | 55.0 (48.0, 68.5) |
| Size of implanted device, mean (SD) | 27.5 (4.1) |
| Device compression, mean (SD) | 0.1 (0.1) |
| Peridevice leak | 48 (19.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency | 77 (31.7%) |
| LAA contrast patency without visible PDL | 28 (11.5%) |
| Mid-device gap area, mm2, median (IQR) | 42.5 (26.0–97.0) |
| HAT morphology | |
| ȃNo HAT | 88 (36.1%) |
| ȃSubfabric | 59 (24.2%) |
| ȃFlat sessile | 78 (32.0%) |
| ȃProtruding sessile | 17 (7.0%) |
| ȃPedunculated | 2 (0.8%) |
| Device lobe morphology | |
| ȃMarshmallow | 156 (63.9%) |
| ȃHot dog | 20 (8.2%) |
| ȃBell | 68 (27.9%) |
| Discharge antithrombotic therapy | |
| Aspirin monotherapy | 80 (32.8%) |
| Clopidogrel monotherapy | 1 (0.4%) |
| Dual antiplatelet therapy | 159 (65.2%) |
| Other therapies | 1 (0.4%) |
| No antithrombotic therapy | 3 (1.2%) |
Data are presented as mean (±SD), median (IQR) or numbers (%).
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
