Modelos europeos de telemedicina, como el servicio finlandés Medilux, permiten realizar consultas médicas online mediante un cuestionario clínico, sin acudir a una consulta presencial.

AMULET vs. WATCHMAN: Appendage Closure Devices, Head to Head

This research was designed to compare the double closure system of the AMULET device with the WATCHMAN (an evidence-backed proven device).

AMULET vs WATCHMAN. Los dispositivos de cierre de orejuela cabeza a cabeza

In that context, to prevent stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, the Amplatzer AMULET device was non-inferior in both safety and efficacy compared with the WATCHMAN. Atrial appendage occlusion in itself improved with AMULET, but with a higher rate of procedure-related complications that decreased with operator experience.

This study randomized 1878 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and increased risk of stroke 1:1 to atrial appendage occlusion with either the AMULET or the WATCHMAN device.

There were two primary endpoints: one for safety (a composite of procedure-related complications, all-cause mortality, or major bleeding at 1 year) and one for efficacy (a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 18 months), plus total appendage occlusion at 45 days.

The secondary endpoints were combinations of the aforementioned events.

The AMULET device was non-inferior to the WATCHMAN in the primary efficacy endpoint (14.5% vs. 14.7%; 95% confidence interval: 3.42 to 3.13; p < 0.001 for non-inferiority).

Major bleeding and all-cause mortality were also similar between devices (10.6% vs. 10.0% and 3.9% vs. 5.1%, respectively).


Read also: Asymptomatic Carotid Lesions and Cognitive Impairment: Does Intervention Play a Role?


The AMULET device almost doubled peri-procedural complications (4.5% vs. 2.5%)—primarily due to pericardial effusion and device embolization.

Major bleeding rates were similar in both groups (11.6% vs. 12.3%), while effective atrial appendage occlusion was higher with the AMULET device.

Conclusion

The AMULET atrial appendage occluder device was non-inferior in terms of safety and efficacy to the WATCHMAN device for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Periprocedural complications observed with the AMULET decreased with operator experience.

amulet-versus-watchman

Original Title: AMPLATZERTM AMULETTM LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE OCCLUDER VERSUS WATCHMANTM DEVICE FOR STROKE PROPHYLAXIS (AMULET IDE): A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.

Reference: Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy et al. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057063.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Percutaneous closure of paravalvular leaks in high-risk patients: clinical outcomes and the impact of residual leak

Paravalvular leak (PVL) is a relatively frequent complication following valve replacement (overall incidence 5–18%; 2–10% in the aortic position and 7–17% in the mitral...

SCAI 2026 | Can an atrial fixation device prevent complications of transcatheter mitral valve replacement? Analysis of the AltaValve system

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) represents one of the most complex areas within structural interventions. Unlike TAVI, where valvular anatomy typically provides more predictable...

Beyond TAVI: Cardiac Rehabilitation as a Determinant of Clinical Outcomes

Aortic stenosis is an increasingly prevalent condition associated with population aging, with a prevalence of approximately 3.4% in individuals over 75 years of age...

Comparative outcomes between transaxillary approach and thoracotomy-based approaches in TAVI with alternative access

TAVI has become the standard treatment for high-risk aortic stenosis. When transfemoral access is not feasible (approximately 10–15%), alternative approaches are used: transaxillary (subclavian...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

KISS Trial: provisional stenting in non-left main coronary bifurcations — is less more?

Coronary bifurcation angioplasty remains one of the most frequent and technically challenging scenarios in interventional cardiology. Between 15% and 20% of coronary procedures involve...

Complex radial access: a four-step protocol to overcome loops and tortuosity

Radial access is currently the preferred strategy for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions due to its lower rates of bleeding and vascular complications...

Percutaneous closure of paravalvular leaks in high-risk patients: clinical outcomes and the impact of residual leak

Paravalvular leak (PVL) is a relatively frequent complication following valve replacement (overall incidence 5–18%; 2–10% in the aortic position and 7–17% in the mitral...