Left atrial appendage occlusion using LAmbre Amulet and Watchman in atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been suggested as an alternative to anticoagulation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). The present study aimed to compare a LAmbre LAA occluder system [Lifetech Scientific (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd., Shenzhen, China] with the most investigated Amulet (St. Jude Medical Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA) and Watchman (Boston Scientific, Plymouth, MN, USA) devices in terms of peri-procedural and short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study.

RESULTS

Overall, 140 patients (50 female, mean age 76.2±8.4 years) were consecutively enrolled. Mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.8±1.5, and mean HAS-BLED score was 3.9±1.1. Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the three groups (LAmbre, n=30; Amulet, n=74; Watchman, n=36); the LAmbre group had significantly more patients with complicated LAA morphology (p=0.006). The implant success rate was 100% in LAmbre, 99% in Amulet, and 100% in Watchman group (p=0.638). The number of device repositions was not significantly different between groups (0.7±1.1 in LAmbre, 1.0±2.0 in Amulet, and 1.4±1.8 in Watchman group, p=0.345). Fluoroscopic and procedural times were similar between groups. Major peri-procedural adverse events did not differ between groups (0% vs. 0% vs. 2.8%, p=0.233). Six months' follow-up showed good device stability and patients' clinical condition in all groups.

CONCLUSION

LAmbre, Amulet, and Watchman exhibit remarkable implant success rate, low risk of peri-procedural adverse events, and good clinical outcomes.