Amulet or Watchman Device for Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Primary Results of the SWISS-APERO Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliation auteurs!!!! Error affiliation !!!!
TitreAmulet or Watchman Device for Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Primary Results of the SWISS-APERO Randomized Clinical Trial
Type de publicationJournal Article
Year of Publication2022
AuteursGalea R, De Marco F, Meneveau N, Aminian A, Anselme F, Grani C, Huber AT, Teiger E, Iriart X, Bosombo FBabongo, Heg D, Franzone A, Vranckx P, Fischer U, Pedrazzini G, Bedogni F, Raber L, Valgimigli M
JournalCIRCULATION
Volume145
Pagination724-738
Date PublishedMAR 8
Type of ArticleArticle
ISSN0009-7322
Mots-clésatrial appendage, computed tomography angiography
Résumé

{BACKGROUND: No study has so far compared Amulet with the new Watchman FLX in terms of residual left atrial appendage (LAA) patency or clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous LAA closure. METHODS: In the investigator-initiated SWISS APERO trial (Comparison of Amulet Versus Watchman/FLX Device in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure), patients undergoing LAA closure were randomly assigned (1:1) open label to receive Amulet or Watchman 2.5 or FLX (Watchman) across 8 European centers. The primary end point was the composite of justified crossover to a nonrandomized device during LAA closure procedure or residual LAA patency detected by cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at 45 days. The secondary end points included procedural complications, device-related thrombus, peridevice leak at transesophageal echocardiography, and clinical outcomes at 45 days. Results: Between June 2018 and May 2021, 221 patients were randomly assigned to Amulet (111 [50.2%]) or Watchman (110 [49.8%]), of whom 25 (22.7%) patients included before October 2019 received Watchman 2.5, and 85 (77.3%) patients received Watchman FLX. The primary end point was assessable in 205 (92.8%) patients and occurred in 71 (67.6%) patients receiving Amulet and 70 (70.0%) patients receiving Watchman, respectively (risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.80-1.16]; P=0.713). A single justified crossover occurred in a patient with Amulet who fulfilled LAA patency criteria at 45-day CCTA. Major procedure-related complications occurred more frequently in the Amulet group (9.0% versus 2.7%; P=0.047) because of more frequent bleeding (7.2% versus 1.8%). At 45 days, the peridevice leak rate at transesophageal echocardiography was higher with Watchman than with Amulet (27.5% versus 13.7%

DOI10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057859