{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028985507246376812, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.089743589743589, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of postprocedural anticoagulation in high‐risk patients undergoing WATCHMAN device implantation

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to long‐term anticoagulation for thromboembolic protection in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and high bleeding risk. Short‐term Warfarin use following LAAC is well‐studied, while data pertaining to novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) use in this setting is less robust. Specifically, data regarding the safety and efficacy of postprocedural NOAC use in high‐risk patients is lacking.