Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2026
The WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 28, 2012
Watchman FLX versus Amplatzer amulet for percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: A systematic review and
Vinicius Bittar de Pontes1, Pedro E P Carvalho2, Nicole Felix3
1Division of Medicine, Centro Universitário das Faculdades Associadas de Ensino, São João da Boa Vista, Brazil.
Background:
The comparative safety and efficacy of Watchman FLX (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) and Amplatzer Amulet (Abbott, Abbott Park, IL, USA) devices for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) remain unclear.
Objective:
To compare Watchman FLX and Amplatzer Amulet devices for LAAO.
Methods:
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing Watchman FLX versus Amulet in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous LAAO. We applied a random-effects model to pool risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for binary endpoints.
Results:
We included five studies comprising 1316 patients with AF undergoing LAAO for high bleeding risk. A total of 629 (47.8 %) patients underwent LAAO with Watchman FLX. Amulet was associated with lower rates of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR 2.31; 95 % CI 1.02-5.25; p = 0.04; I2 = 0 %), but no differences were observed in terms of peridevice leak (RR 1.57; 95 % CI 0.86-2.89; p = 0.14; I2 = 0 %) between Watchman and Amulet devices. Additionally, no differences were found in terms of device-related thrombus (RR 2.01; 95 % CI 0.87-4.68; p = 0.10; I2 = 0 %), or pericardial effusion (RR 1.00; 95 % CI 0.17-5.96; p = 1.00; I2 = 59.7 %) between both groups.
Conclusion:
This meta-analysis indicates a lower risk of stroke or TIA with Amulet compared to Watchman FLX.
