2. I. Medizinische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Germany
3. Heart Center, Segeberger Kliniken GmbH, Bad Segeberg, Germany
4. Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
5. I. Medizinische Klinik B, Klinikum der Stadt Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany
6. Innere Medizin III, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Germany
7. Stiftung Institut für Herzinfarktforschung (IHF), Ludwigshafen, Germany
8. Klinik für Kardiologie, Pneumologie und Intern. Intensivmed., Klinikum Neuperlach, München, Germany
9. Peter Osypka Heart Center Munich, München, Germany
10. Medizinische Klinik II, Klinikum Coburg, Coburg, Germany
11. Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK, United Kingdom
As a public service to our readership, this article - peer reviewed by the Editors of EuroIntervention - has been published immediately upon acceptance as it was received. The content of this article is the sole responsibility of the authors, and not that of the journal or its publishers.
Please note that supplementary movies are not available online at this stage. Once a paper is published in its edited and formatted form, it will be accompanied online by any supplementary movies.
To read the full content of this article, please log in to download the PDF.
Methods and results: The work represents a non-randomized sub-analysis of the prospective, multicenter, Left-Atrium-Appendage Occluder Register - GErmany (LAARGE) registry. The WATCHMAN (group 1) and the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP) or Amulet occluder (group 2) were assessed. A total of 641 patients at 38 centers were enrolled. Of them, 278 (43%) and 340 (53%) patients received the WATCHMAN and ACP/Amulet occluder, respectively. High technical success was achieved with a slight difference between the groups (96% in group 1 vs. 99% in group 2; p=0.007). Procedural safety did not differ (98% in group 1 vs. 97% in group 2; p=0.55). The Kaplan Meier estimated 1-year composite of death or stroke was 12.0% and 12.9%, respectively (p=0.79).
Conclusions: Both the WATCHMAN and the ACP/Amulet occluder provide excellent procedural results with comparable implantation success and no differences with respect to procedural safety and long-term effectiveness.
Sign in to read and download the full articleForgot your password?
Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com