Amplatzer Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder Versus Watchman Device for Stroke Prophylaxis (Amulet IDE): A Randomized, Controlled Trial
Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, David Thaler, Christopher R Ellis, Vijendra Swarup, Lars Sondergaard, John Carroll, Michael R Gold, James Hermiller, Hans-Christoph Diener, Boris Schmidt, Lee MacDonald, Moussa Mansour, Brijeshwar Maini, Laura O'Brien, Stephan Windecker, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, David Thaler, Christopher R Ellis, Vijendra Swarup, Lars Sondergaard, John Carroll, Michael R Gold, James Hermiller, Hans-Christoph Diener, Boris Schmidt, Lee MacDonald, Moussa Mansour, Brijeshwar Maini, Laura O'Brien, Stephan Windecker
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage (LAA) is an alternative to chronic oral anticoagulation to reduce stroke risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The Amulet IDE trial (Amplatzer Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder IDE Trial) was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the dual-seal mechanism of the Amulet LAA occluder compared with the Watchman device.
Methods: Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at increased risk of stroke were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo percutaneous implantation of a LAA occluder with the Amulet occluder or Watchman device. The primary end points included safety (composite of procedure-related complications, all-cause death, or major bleeding at 12 months), effectiveness (composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 18 months), and the rate of LAA occlusion at 45 days. Prespecified secondary end points included a composite of all stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular/unexplained death at 18 months, major bleeding at 18 months, and superiority test of the 3 primary end points.
Results: A total of 1878 patients were enrolled. The Amulet occluder was noninferior to the Watchman device for the primary safety end point (14.5% versus 14.7%; difference=-0.14 [95% CI, -3.42 to 3.13]; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Major bleeding and all-cause death were similar between groups (10.6% versus 10.0% and 3.9% versus 5.1%, respectively). Procedure-related complications were higher for the Amulet occluder (4.5% versus 2.5%), largely related to more frequent pericardial effusion and device embolization. The Amulet occluder was noninferior to the Watchman device for the primary effectiveness end point (2.8% versus 2.8%; difference=0.00 [95% CI, -1.55 to 1.55]; P<0.001 for noninferiority), and the composite of stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular/unexplained death (5.6% versus 7.7%, difference=-2.12 [95% CI, -4.45 to 0.21]; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of major bleeding was similar between groups (11.6% versus 12.3%; difference=-0.71 [95% CI, -3.72 to 2.31]; P=0.32 for superiority). LAA occlusion was higher for the Amulet occluder than for the Watchman device (98.9% versus 96.8%; difference=2.03 [95% CI, 0.41-3.66]; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.003 for superiority).
Conclusions: The Amulet occluder was noninferior for safety and effectiveness of stroke prevention for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation compared with the Watchman device and superior for LAA occlusion. Procedure-related complications were higher with the Amulet occluder and decreased with operator experience. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02879448.
Keywords: anticoagulants; atrial appendage; atrial fibrillation; prevention & control; stroke.
Figures
References
- Ball J, Carrington MJ, McMurray JJ, Stewart S. Atrial fibrillation: profile and burden of an evolving epidemic in the 21st century. Int J Cardiol. 2013; 167:1807–1824. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.12.093
- Shameem R, Ansell J. Disadvantages of VKA and requirements for novel anticoagulants. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2013; 26:103–14. doi: 10.1016/j.beha.2013.07.009
- Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, Gibson DN, Price MJ, Huber K, Horton RP, Buchbinder M, Neuzil P, Gordon NT, et al. ; PREVAIL and PROTECT AF Investigators. 5-year outcomes after left atrial appendage closure: from the PREVAIL and PROTECT AF trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70:2964–2975. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.021
- Lakkireddy D, Windecker S, Thaler D, Søndergaard L, Carroll J, Gold MR, Guo H, Brunner KJ, Hermiller JB, Diener HC, et al. . Rationale and design for AMPLATZER Amulet Left Atrial Appendage Occluder IDE randomized controlled trial (Amulet IDE trial). Am Heart J. 2019; 211:45–53. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.12.010
- Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, Boechler M, Rich MW, Radford MJ. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. JAMA. 2001; 285:2864–2870. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.22.2864
- Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R, Lane DA, Crijns HJ. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest. 2010; 137:263–272. doi: 10.1378/chest.09-1584
- Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, Gibson CM, Caixeta A, Eikelboom J, Kaul S, Wiviott SD, Menon V, Nikolsky E, et al. . Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation. 2011; 123:2736–2747. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.009449
- Hochberg Y. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance Biometrika. 1988; 75:800–802
- Tzikas A, Holmes DR, Jr, Gafoor S, Ruiz CE, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Diener HC, Cappato R, Kar S, Lee RJ, Byrne RA, et al. . Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: the Munich consensus document on definitions, endpoints, and data collection requirements for clinical studies. Europace. 2017; 19:4–15. doi: 10.1093/europace/euw141
- Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C, Boriani G, Castella M, Dan GA, Dilaveris PE, et al. ; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021; 42:373–498. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612
- Landmesser U, Tondo C, Camm J, Diener HC, Paul V, Schmidt B, Settergren M, Teiger E, Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Hildick-Smith D. Left atrial appendage occlusion with the AMPLATZER Amulet device: one-year follow-up from the prospective global Amulet observational registry. EuroIntervention. 2018; 14:e590–e597. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00344
- Kar S, Doshi SK, Sadhu A, Horton R, Osorio J, Ellis C, Stone J, Jr, Shah M, Dukkipati SR, Adler S, Nair DG, Kim J, et al. ; PINNACLE FLX Investigators. Primary outcome evaluation of a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device: results from the PINNACLE FLX Trial. Circulation. 2021; 143:1754–1762. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.050117
- Whitlock RP, Belley-Cote EP, Paparella D, Healey JS, Brady K, Sharma M, Reents W, Budera P, Baddour AJ, Fila P, et al. ; LAAOS III Investigators. Left atrial appendage occlusion during cardiac surgery to prevent stroke. N Engl J Med. 2021; 384:2081–2091. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2101897
Source: PubMed