International Journal of Cardiology: Heart & Vasculature (Feb 2022)

Impact of operatoŕs experience on peri-procedural outcomes with Watchman FLX: Insights from the FLX-SPA registry

  • Ignacio Cruz-González,
  • Francisco Torres Saura,
  • Blanca Trejo-Velasco,
  • José Antonio Fernández Díaz,
  • Ricardo Fajardo Molina,
  • Raquel del Valle-Fernández,
  • Gerardo Moreno Terribas,
  • David Martí Sánchez,
  • José-Ramón López-Mínguez,
  • Ivan Gomez-Blazquez,
  • Juan-Carlos Sanmartin Pena,
  • Javier Botas,
  • Pedro Martin Lorenzo,
  • Jorge Palazuelos,
  • Ramón Albarrán Rincon,
  • Mohsen Mohandes,
  • Felipe-Jose Rodriguez Entem,
  • Gerard Martí,
  • Ernesto Valero,
  • Hipólito Gutiérrez,
  • Ignacio J. Amat-Santos,
  • Luis Nombela-Franco,
  • Pablo Salinas,
  • Luis Teruel,
  • Joan-Antoni Gomez-Hospital,
  • Dabit Arzamendi,
  • Mario Torres Sanabria,
  • Germán Calle Pérez,
  • Dolores Cañadas Pruaño,
  • Armando Pérez de Prado,
  • Tomás Benito González,
  • Eduardo Arroyo-Úcar,
  • Rodrigo Estévez-Loureiro,
  • Berenice Caneiro-Queija,
  • Jose L. Ibañez Criado,
  • Juan M. Ruiz-Nodar

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 38
p. 100941

Abstract

Read online

Background: The Watchman FLX is a device upgrade of the Watchman 2.5 that incorporates several design enhancements intended to simplify left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) and improve procedural outcomes. This study compares peri-procedural results of LAAO with Watchman FLX (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) in centers with varying degrees of experience with the Watchman 2.5 and Watchman FLX. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, “real-world” registry including consecutive patients undergoing LAAO with the Watchman FLX at 26 Spanish sites (FLX-SPA registry). Implanting centers were classified according to the center’s prior experience with the Watchman 2.5. A further division of centers according to whether or not they had performed ≤ 10 or > 10Watchman FLX implants was prespecified at the beginning of the study. Procedural outcomes of institutions stratified according to their experience with the Watchman 2.5 and FLX devices were compared. Results: 359 patients [mean age 75.5 (SD8.1), CHA2DS2-VASc 4.4 (SD1.4), HAS-BLED 3.8(SD0.9)] were included. Global success rate was 98.6%, successful LAAO with the first selected device size was achieved in 95.5% patients and the device was implanted at first attempt in 78.6% cases. There were only 9(2.5%) major peri-procedural complications. No differences in efficacy or safety results according to the centeŕs previous experience with Watchman 2.5 and procedural volume with Watchman FLX existed. Conclusions: The Watchman FLX attains high procedural success rates with complete LAA sealing in unselected, real-world patients, along with a low incidence of peri-procedural complications, regardless of operatoŕs experience with its previous device iteration or the number of Watchman FLX devices implanted.

Keywords