Key result
The abstract introduces a meta-analysis comparing the Amplatzer Amulet occluder to the Watchman FLX device but does not report any quantitative results.
Meta-Analysis
Cohort data indicate comparable LAAO safety and efficacy for Amulet versus Watchman; leaves open whether device-specific differences affect stroke severity or OAC use.
Left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion (LAAO) provides effective protection against thromboembolic events in high-risk, atrial fibrillation patients. Two percutaneous devices currently are available in the United States for stroke prophylaxis: the WatchmanTM device (Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA) and the AmplatzerTM AmuletTM LAA occluder (Abbott, Minneapolis, MN). The latter recently received US Food and Drug Administration approval as a result of the findings of the Amulet IDE randomized trial,1 which showed superiority for LAAO (lower rates of leaks >5 mm) based on a comparison between the second-generation AmplatzerTM plug, namely, the AmuletTM occluder, and the old-generation WatchmanTM 2.5.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rocca et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Atrial fibrillation. Amplatzer Amulet occluder vs. Watchman FLX device was evaluated. The abstract introduces a meta-analysis comparing the Amplatzer Amulet occluder to the Watchman FLX device but does not report any quantitative results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: