WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

NCT ID: NCT00129545

Last Updated: 2015-05-15

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2/PHASE3

Total Enrollment

800 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2005-02-28

Study Completion Date

2014-05-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This is a multi-center, prospective, randomized study, stratified by center, comparing the WATCHMAN device to long term warfarin therapy, demonstrating that the treatment arm is non-inferior to the control arm. This study was amended to allow for a non-randomized arm and increased enrollment.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The WATCHMAN device is designed to be permanently implanted distal to the ostium of the left atrial appendage (LAA) to trap potential emboli before they exit the LAA.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Atrial Fibrillation Stroke

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

WATCHMAN

Implant of WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Intervention Type DEVICE

Implant of WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Warfarin control

Subjects are treated with current standard of care Oral Anticoagulation Therapy with Warfarin

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Warfarin

Intervention Type DRUG

Subjects receive warfarin

Roll-in

Implant of WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology. Up to 3 non-randomized subjects per site, these subjects were not included in the primary analysis.

Group Type OTHER

WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Intervention Type DEVICE

Implant of WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Implant of WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology

Intervention Type DEVICE

Warfarin

Subjects receive warfarin

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

WATCHMAN Coumadin

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patient has paroxysmal, persistent or permanent non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF)
* Eligible for long term warfarin
* CHADS score \>= 1 \[congestive heart failure (CHF), history of high blood pressure, 75 years of age or older, diabetes, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA)\]

Exclusion Criteria

* Contraindicated for warfarin
* Contraindicated for aspirin or clopidogrel (Plavix)
* Congestive heart failure (CHF) Class 4
* Implanted mechanical valve
* Atrial septal or Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) device
* Platelets \< 100,000 or hemoglobin \< 10
* Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) \< 30%
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Boston Scientific Corporation

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

David Holmes, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Mayo Clinic

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Advanced Cardiac Specialists

Gilbert, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Arizona Arrhythmia

Scottsdale, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Foundation for Cardiovascular Medicine

La Jolla, California, United States

Site Status

Los Angeles Cardiology Associates

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

Los Angeles, California, United States

Site Status

El Camino Hospital

Mountain View, California, United States

Site Status

Orange County Heart

Orange County, California, United States

Site Status

UC Davis Medical Center

Sacramento, California, United States

Site Status

St. John's Hospital / Pacific Heart

Santa Monica, California, United States

Site Status

Washington Hospital Center

Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States

Site Status

University of Miami

Miami, Florida, United States

Site Status

Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute

Miami, Florida, United States

Site Status

Bay Heart Group

Tampa, Florida, United States

Site Status

Emory University Midtown Hospital

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Piedmont Hospital

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Emory University Hospital

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois, United States

Site Status

North Shore University

Evanston, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Loyola University Medical Center

Maywood, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Prairie Education Research Cooperative

Springfield, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Baptist Hospital West

Lexington, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

University of Kentucky

Lexington, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Terrebonne General Medical Center

Houma, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Ochsner Clinic

New Orleans, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

University of Michigan Medical Center

Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Site Status

William Beaumont

Royal Oak, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Abbott Northwestern Hospital

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Mayo Clinic

Rochester, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

St. Paul Heart Clinic

Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

University of Mississippi Healthcare Center

Jackson, Mississippi, United States

Site Status

St. Luke's Hospital

Kansas City, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Nebraska Heart Institute

Lincoln, Nebraska, United States

Site Status

Cooper University Hospital

Camden, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

New Mexico Heart Institute

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

New York University Medical Center

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Columbia University Medical Center

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Mt. Sinai Medical Center

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Summa Health System

Akron, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Lindner Clinical Trial Center

Cincinnati, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Cleveland Clinic Foundation

Cleveland, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Ohio State University

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Riverside Methodist Hospital

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Geisinger Medical Center

Danville, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Harrisburg Hospital / Associated Cardiology

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Allegheny General Hospital

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Presbyterian University Hospital

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Moffitt Heart & Vascular

Wormleysburg, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Mercy Medical Center West

Knoxville, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

St. Thomas Research Institute

Nashville, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia

Austin, Texas, United States

Site Status

St. Lukes Episcopal Hospital

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Intermountain Medical Center

Salt Lake City, Utah, United States

Site Status

University of Virginia

Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Inova Fairfax Hospital

Falls Church, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Sentara Norfolk General Hospital

Norfolk, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Swedish Medical Center

Seattle, Washington, United States

Site Status

Marshfield Clinic

Marshfield, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

Na Homolce

Prague, , Czechia

Site Status

Krankenhaus der Barmherzige Bruder

Regensburg, Bavaria, Germany

Site Status

Cardiovasculares Centrum Frankfurt - Sankt Katharinen

Frankfurt am Main, Hesse, Germany

Site Status

Herzzentrum

Leipzig, , Germany

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States Czechia Germany

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Dukkipati SR, Holmes DR Jr, Doshi SK, Kar S, Singh SM, Gibson D, Price MJ, Natale A, Mansour M, Sievert H, Houle VM, Allocco DJ, Reddy VY. Impact of Peridevice Leak on 5-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 Aug 2;80(5):469-483. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.04.062.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 35902169 (View on PubMed)

Brouwer TF, Whang W, Kuroki K, Halperin JL, Reddy VY. Net Clinical Benefit of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Pooled Analysis of the Randomized PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL Studies. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Dec 3;8(23):e013525. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.013525. Epub 2019 Nov 22.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 31752643 (View on PubMed)

Price MJ, Reddy VY, Valderrabano M, Halperin JL, Gibson DN, Gordon N, Huber KC, Holmes DR Jr. Bleeding Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure Compared With Long-Term Warfarin: A Pooled, Patient-Level Analysis of the WATCHMAN Randomized Trial Experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Dec 28;8(15):1925-1932. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.08.035. Epub 2015 Nov 25.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 26627989 (View on PubMed)

Reddy VY, Sievert H, Halperin J, Doshi SK, Buchbinder M, Neuzil P, Huber K, Whisenant B, Kar S, Swarup V, Gordon N, Holmes D; PROTECT AF Steering Committee and Investigators. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure vs warfarin for atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014 Nov 19;312(19):1988-98. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.15192.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 25399274 (View on PubMed)

Alli O, Doshi S, Kar S, Reddy V, Sievert H, Mullin C, Swarup V, Whisenant B, Holmes D Jr. Quality of life assessment in the randomized PROTECT AF (Percutaneous Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage Versus Warfarin Therapy for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) trial of patients at risk for stroke with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Apr 30;61(17):1790-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.061. Epub 2013 Feb 28.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23500276 (View on PubMed)

Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Sievert H, Buchbinder M, Neuzil P, Huber K, Halperin JL, Holmes D; PROTECT AF Investigators. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation: 2.3-Year Follow-up of the PROTECT AF (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) Trial. Circulation. 2013 Feb 12;127(6):720-9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.114389. Epub 2013 Jan 16.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23325525 (View on PubMed)

Reddy VY, Holmes D, Doshi SK, Neuzil P, Kar S. Safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: results from the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients with AF (PROTECT AF) clinical trial and the Continued Access Registry. Circulation. 2011 Feb 1;123(4):417-24. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.976449. Epub 2011 Jan 17.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 21242484 (View on PubMed)

Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Turi ZG, Doshi SK, Sievert H, Buchbinder M, Mullin CM, Sick P; PROTECT AF Investigators. Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2009 Aug 15;374(9689):534-42. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61343-X.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 19683639 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

ST1021 and ST1055

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

CHAMPION-AF Clinical Trial
NCT04394546 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA
HEAL-LAA Clinical Trial
NCT05809596 COMPLETED NA