Search

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a crucial intervention for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who are unsuitable for long-term anticoagulation. Amulet and Watchman are the most implanted devices worldwide for performing LAAC, and the aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive comparison focusing on their efficacy, safety, and short- and long-term outcomes. The Watchman device, the first to gain FDA approval, has been extensively studied and demonstrates significant reductions in stroke and systemic embolism rates. The Amulet device, a newer alternative, promises enhanced design features for more efficient appendage sealing. Current data highlight that both devices offer similar efficacy and safety for LAAC. While the two devices differ in terms of intraprocedural complication rates, they offer similar short- to long-term outcomes in terms of peri-device leaks, device-related thrombosis, and mortality. Both devices are indicated for patients who are unable to tolerate OAC, given their similar risk and safety profiles. Newer clinical studies are directed at establishing the efficacy of both devices as the primary method for stroke prevention in AF as an alternative to OAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Guidelines recommend the use of neurohormonal antagonists for all patients with heart failure and mitral regurgitation (MR) as an initial treatment strategy.1,2 Patients with symptoms despite maximally tolerated neurohormonal antagonist treatment, evidence-based therapy (EBT), and moderate-to-severe MR who are surgery-ineligible may undergo transcatheter mitral valve repair with the MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, IL, USA) system. Patients undergoing the MitraClip procedure for secondary MR with EBT are at lower risk of death compared to patients without EBT. In the era of surgical and transcatheter treatment options, the importance of medications may be neglected when severe MR is present in a patient with heart failure. [Extracted from the article]