SynthesisClinical cardiology2023
Clinical efficacy and safety comparison of Watchman device versus ACP/Amulet device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A study-level meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparing Effectiveness and Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety comparison of Watchman device versus ACP/Amulet device for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: A study-level meta-analysis of clinical trials.Clinical cardiology · 2023Pooled it
- WATCHMAN and Amplatzer Amulet for left atrial appendage occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Standalone Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Atrial Fibrillation: Procedural Approaches and Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Brazilian Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
- The Reconstructed Individual Patient Data from Kaplan-Meier (IPDfromKM) Method for Non-Inferiority Analyses: A New Potential Application.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Comparative Endothelialization of the Watchman Plug Device and LACBES Pacifier Occluder after Left Atrial Appendage Closure.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Watchman vs. Amulet for Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A Comprehensive Review of Percutaneous and Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Left atrial appendage occlusion is not inferior to oral anticoagulants in the prevention of stroke in several randomized controlled trials. However, the clinical efficacy and safety comparison of the Watchman and amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP)/Amulet devices for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation was controversial. A database search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov for trials that compared Watchman device vs ACP/Amulet device. The effective outcomes were stroke and systemic embolism. Safety outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and major bleeding. Device-related complications included device-related thrombus (DRT), peri-device leaks (PDL > 5 mm). A total of 19 articles involving 6224 patients were included in the present study. The Watchman and ACP/Amulet groups comprised 3267 and 2957 patients, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected in the stroke (odd ratio [OR]:1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-1.67, p = .17, I
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.