Randomized Comparison of Devices for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Similar clinical outcomes at 45 days were observed with the two U.S. commercial devices.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion has emerged as an alternative to oral anticoagulation for patients with atrial fibrillation. The original device is now in a second iteration (Watchman), and another device (Amulet) recently received FDA approval. This Swiss investigator-initiated, industry-funded, multicenter trial is the first randomized comparison of these two devices.

A total of 221 patients were included in the study; their mean age was 77 years, 29% were women, and 77% of Watchman devices used were second generation. There was no difference between the Watchman and Amulet devices in the primary endpoint of LAA patency or crossover to the other device. Major periprocedural complications occurred more commonly in the Amu…

Reviewing Author

Howard C. Herrmann, MD

Disclosures

Consultant/Advisory BoardAffluent Medical; Artedrone; Caranx; Johnson & Johnson; Medtronic; Prolifagen; Wells Fargo

EquityMicrointerventional Devices, Inc.

RoyaltiesUniversity of Pennsylvania

Grant/Research SupportAbbott Vascular; Edwards Lifesciences; Johnson & Johnson; Medtronic

Editorial BoardsCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions; Journal of the American College of Cardiology; Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions; JACC Cardiovascular Interventions; JACC Case Reports; JSCAI

Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesHeart Valve Collaboratory (Scientific Committee Member, Chair of the Publications Committee)