Aims: This study compares clinical outcomes of Watchman vs. Amplatzer devices for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC).
Methods And Results: Of two real-world registries, the Watchman registry Lichtenfels, Germany, and the Amplatzer registry Bern-Zurich, Switzerland, 303 and 333 consecutive patients, respectively, were included. After a 1:1 propensity score matching, 266 vs. 266 patients were compared by use of the predefined primary efficacy endpoint of stroke, systemic embolism and cardiovascular/unexplained death, the primary safety endpoint of major peri-procedural complications and major bleeding events at follow-up, and the combined hazard endpoint, a composite of all above-mentioned hazards. Mean age was 75.3 ± 7.8 (Watchman) vs. 75.1 ± 9.9 (Amplatzer) years, CHA2DS2-VASc score 4.5 ± 1.7 vs. 4.5 ± 1.5, and HAS-BLED score 3.2 ± 1.0 vs. 3.2 ± 1.0. At a mean follow-up of 2.4 ± 1.3 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5 years and 1.322 patient-years, the primary endpoints of efficacy [40/646, 6.2% [Watchman] vs. 43/676, 6.4% [Amplatzer]; hazard ratio (HR), 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66-1.58; P = 0.92] and safety (33/646, 5.1% vs. 30/676, 4.4%; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.29-1.11; P = 0.10), as well as the combined hazard endpoint (69/646, 10.7% vs. 66/676, 9.8%; HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.55-1.12; P = 0.26) were similar for both groups.
Conclusion: This study suggests comparable efficacy and safety of the Watchman and Amplatzer devices.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaa001 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
5-Year Results From the AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder Randomized Controlled Trial.
J Am Coll Cardiol
November 2024
University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Background: The Amulet IDE trial (AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder [LAAO] Investigational Device Exemption [IDE] Trial) evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the Amulet occluder (Abbott) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The Amulet IDE trial is the largest randomized LAAO trial, comparing the Amulet occluder with the Watchman 2.5 device (Boston Scientific).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAdverse outcomes with left atrial appendage occlusion device implantation in chronic and end stage kidney disease: A systemic review and meta-analysis.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med
August 2024
Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE, United States of America. Electronic address:
Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end stage renal disease (ESRD) are associated with increased risk of bleeding events, including hemorrhagic stroke, and periprocedural and gastrointestinal bleeding among patients with atrial fibrillation who are on anticoagulation. Safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) among this patient population has been uncertain with studies showing contradictory results.
Methods: PubMed and Google Scholar databases were queried for studies comparing outcomes among patients with and without significant CKD, and with and without ESRD who underwent LAAO device implantation.
Clinical outcome and intraprocedural characteristics of left atrial appendage occlusion: a comparison between single-occlusive plug-type and dual-occlusive disc-type devices.
Front Cardiovasc Med
July 2024
Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Department of Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Berlin, Germany.
Article Synopsis
- Percutaneous interventional left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a proven method for preventing strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and has been evaluated in a study involving 149 patients at a Berlin hospital from 2016 to 2022.
- The study compared two types of devices used in LAAO: single-occlusive plug-type (SOPT) and dual-occlusive disc-type (DODT), noting that while DODT procedures took longer, both had successful implantation with low rates of complications and no hospital deaths.
- After six months, findings indicated that SOPT had a higher rate of device-related thrombus formation compared
Comparative Profiles of the WATCHMAN™ and Amplatzer™ Cardiac Plug/Amplatzer™ Amulet™ Devices for Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
J Innov Card Rhythm Manag
June 2024
Department of Internal Medicine, Allama Iqbal Medical College, Lahore, Pakistan.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent cardiac arrhythmia marked by irregular and frequent tachycardic rhythms in the atria, affecting 1%-2% of the general population. The WATCHMAN™ device from Boston Scientific (Marlborough, MA, USA) and the Amplatzer™ Amulet™ device from Abbott (Chicago, IL, USA) are two devices used globally for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in non-valvular AF. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier's ScienceDirect literature databases to identify studies comparing the WATCHMAN™ procedure with Amulet™ device implantation for LAAC in patients with AF.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComparative Assessment of Percutaneous Left-Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Devices-A Single Center Cohort Study.
J Cardiovasc Dev Dis
May 2024
Department of Internal Medicine III, Heidelberg University, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Background: Percutaneous left-atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established method for preventing strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation, offering an alternative to oral anticoagulation. Various occluder devices have been developed to cater to individual anatomical needs and ensure a safe and effective procedure. In this retrospective, monocentric cohort study, we compare different LAAO devices with respect to clinical outcomes, LAA sealing properties, and device-related complications.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!