Department of Cardiology (R.G., C.G., L.R., M.V.), Bern University Hospital, Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Cardiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy (F.D.M., F.B.).
Circulation. 2022 Mar 8;145(10):724-738. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057859. Epub 2021 Nov 6.
No study has so far compared Amulet with the new Watchman FLX in terms of residual left atrial appendage (LAA) patency or clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous LAA closure.
In the investigator-initiated SWISS APERO trial (Comparison of Amulet Versus Watchman/FLX Device in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure), patients undergoing LAA closure were randomly assigned (1:1) open label to receive Amulet or Watchman 2.5 or FLX (Watchman) across 8 European centers. The primary end point was the composite of justified crossover to a nonrandomized device during LAA closure procedure or residual LAA patency detected by cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at 45 days. The secondary end points included procedural complications, device-related thrombus, peridevice leak at transesophageal echocardiography, and clinical outcomes at 45 days.
Between June 2018 and May 2021, 221 patients were randomly assigned to Amulet (111 [50.2%]) or Watchman (110 [49.8%]), of whom 25 (22.7%) patients included before October 2019 received Watchman 2.5, and 85 (77.3%) patients received Watchman FLX. The primary end point was assessable in 205 (92.8%) patients and occurred in 71 (67.6%) patients receiving Amulet and 70 (70.0%) patients receiving Watchman, respectively (risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.80-1.16]; =0.713). A single justified crossover occurred in a patient with Amulet who fulfilled LAA patency criteria at 45-day CCTA. Major procedure-related complications occurred more frequently in the Amulet group (9.0% versus 2.7%; =0.047) because of more frequent bleeding (7.2% versus 1.8%). At 45 days, the peridevice leak rate at transesophageal echocardiography was higher with Watchman than with Amulet (27.5% versus 13.7%, =0.020), albeit none was major (ie, >5 mm), whereas device-related thrombus was detected in 1 (0.9%) patient with Amulet and 3 (3.0%) patients with Watchman at CCTA and in 2 (2.1%) and 5 (5.5%) patients at transesophageal echocardiography, respectively. Clinical outcomes at 45 days did not differ between the groups.
Amulet was not associated with a lower rate of the composite of crossover or residual LAA patency compared with Watchman at 45-day CCTA. Amulet, however, was associated with lower peridevice leak rates at transesophageal echocardiography, higher procedural complications, and similar clinical outcomes at 45 days compared with Watchman. The clinical relevance of CCTA-detected LAA patency requires further investigation.
URL: https://www.
gov; Unique identifier: NCT03399851.
目前尚无研究比较 Amulet 与新型 Watchman FLX 在经皮左心耳(LAA)封堵术患者中的残余 LAA 通畅率或临床结局。
在由研究者发起的 SWISS APERO 试验(Amulet 与 Watchman/FLX 装置在接受左心耳封堵术的患者中的比较)中,患者接受 LAA 封堵术时,以 1:1 的比例进行开放标签随机分组,分别接受 Amulet 或 Watchman 2.5 或 FLX(Watchman),研究在 8 个欧洲中心进行。主要终点是封堵过程中合理交叉使用非随机装置或 45 天时心脏计算机断层扫描血管造影(CCTA)检测到残余 LAA 通畅的复合终点。次要终点包括手术并发症、器械相关血栓、经食管超声心动图的器械周围漏以及 45 天时的临床结局。
2018 年 6 月至 2021 年 5 月,221 例患者被随机分配至 Amulet 组(111 例[50.2%])或 Watchman 组(110 例[49.8%]),其中 25 例(22.7%)患者于 2019 年 10 月前接受 Watchman 2.5,85 例(77.3%)患者接受 Watchman FLX。主要终点在 205 例(92.8%)患者中可评估,Amulet 组和 Watchman 组分别有 71 例(67.6%)和 70 例(70.0%)患者发生(风险比,0.97 [95%CI,0.80-1.16];=0.713)。Amulet 组有 1 例患者因满足 45 天 CCTA 的 LAA 通畅标准而发生单次合理交叉。Amulet 组主要手术相关并发症更常见(9.0%比 2.7%;=0.047),因为出血更频繁(7.2%比 1.8%)。45 天时,经食管超声心动图检查显示 Watchman 组的器械周围漏发生率高于 Amulet 组(27.5%比 13.7%;=0.020),尽管没有发生严重的漏(即>5mm),而 Amulet 组有 1 例(0.9%)患者和 Watchman 组有 3 例(3.0%)患者在 CCTA 时发现器械相关血栓,在经食管超声心动图检查时,Amulet 组有 2 例(2.1%)患者和 Watchman 组有 5 例(5.5%)患者发现器械相关血栓。两组患者的临床结局在 45 天时无差异。
在 45 天的 CCTA 检查中,Amulet 与 Watchman 相比,其复合终点或残余 LAA 通畅率没有降低。然而,与 Watchman 相比,Amulet 组的器械周围漏发生率较低,手术并发症较高,45 天时的临床结局相似。CCTA 检测到的 LAA 通畅率的临床意义需要进一步研究。
gov;独特标识符:NCT03399851。