ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2023
Left atrial appendage sealing performance of the Amplatzer Amulet and Watchman FLX device.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- WATCHMAN and Amplatzer Amulet for left atrial appendage occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention: current challenges and future perspectives.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Review
- The ABC of sealing following left atrial appendage closure.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Observational
- Impact of Immunosuppressive Drugs on Patients With Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Comparative Endothelialization of the Watchman Plug Device and LACBES Pacifier Occluder after Left Atrial Appendage Closure.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Advancements in 3D Transoesophageal Echocardiography (TOE) and Computed Tomography (CT) for Stroke Prevention in Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Safety and feasibility of atrial fibrillation ablation after left atrial appendage closure: A single-center experience of the left atrial appendage closure first strategy.Journal of arrhythmia · 2024Article
- 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.The Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2024Review
- Comparative Assessment of Percutaneous Left-Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Devices-A Single Center Cohort Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Clinical outcome and intraprocedural characteristics of left atrial appendage occlusion: a comparison between single-occlusive plug-type and dual-occlusive disc-type devices.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Therapy: Evolution and Growing Evidence.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe left atrial appendage (LAA) sealing properties of the Amplatzer Amulet and Watchman FLX devices were compared using cardiac computed tomography (CT) follow-up.
methodsSingle-center cohort study of patients undergoing LAAO between 2017 and 2020. Two consecutive cohorts were enrolled, one treated with the Amplatzer Amulet (n = 150) up till 2019, and a second cohort treated with the Watchman FLX (n = 150) device from 2019. Cardiac CT was performed 2 months postprocedure. The primary outcome was complete LAA occlusion defined as no visible peri-device leak (PDL) and absence of contrast patency in the distal LAA. Secondary outcomes included PDL, contrast patency without visible PDL, PDL area, and periprocedural complications.
resultsComplete occlusion was achieved in 39 (30.5%) of the Amulet group, compared to 89 (71.8%) of the FLX group, p < 0.001. A PDL at the Amulet disc was present in 65 (50.8%), at the lobe in 16 (12.5%), and at both the disc and lobe in 13 (10.2%). For FLX, a PDL was present in 20 (16.1%). Contrast patency without visible PDL was observed in 24 (18.8%) and 15 (12.1%) of the Amulet and FLX group, respectively. The PDL area at the Amulet mid-lobe was 92 mm
conclusionComplete LAA occlusion was achieved in a significantly higher proportion treated with the Watchman FLX compared to the Amulet device. PDL was smaller with the FLX than the Amulet. Conceptual device design differences make interpretation of results complex, and additional studies with clinical outcomes are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.