Amulet or Watchman Device for Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Primary Results of the SWISS-APERO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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]; P=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%; P=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%, P=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. CONCLUSIONS: 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. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03399851.

Serosurveillance after a COVID-19 vaccine campaign in a Swiss police cohort.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the risk for COVID-19 of police officers, we are studying the seroprevalence in a cohort. The baseline cross-sectional investigation was performed before a vaccination campaign in January/February 2021, and demonstrated a seroprevalence of 12.9%. Here, we demonstrate serosurveillance results after a vaccination campaign. METHODS: The cohort consists of 1022 study participants. The 3- and 6-month follow-up visits were performed in April/May and September 2021. Data on infection and vaccination rates were obtained via measuring antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein and spike protein and online questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean age of the population was 41 (SD 8.8) years, 72% were male and 76% had no comorbidity. Seroconversion was identified in 1.05% of the study population at the 3-month visit and in 0.73% at the 6-month visit, resulting in an infection rate of 1.8% over a time period of 6 months. In comparison, the infection rate in the general population over the same time period was higher (3.18%, p = .018). At the 6-month visit, 77.8% of participants reported being vaccinated once and 70.5% twice; 81% had an anti-S antibody titer of >250 U/ml and 87.1% of ≥2 U/ml. No significant association between infection and job role within the department, working region, or years of experience in the job was found. Anti-spike antibody titers of vaccinated study participants showed a calculated decreasing trend 150-200 days after the second vaccine dose. CONCLUSION: These data confirm the value of the vaccination campaign in an exposed group other than healthcare professionals.

Effect of Paroxetine-Mediated G-Protein Receptor Kinase 2 Inhibition vs Placebo in Patients With Anterior Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Left ventricular remodeling following acute myocardial infarction results in progressive myocardial dysfunction and adversely affects prognosis. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of paroxetine-mediated G-protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 inhibition to mitigate adverse left ventricular remodeling in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted at Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. Patients with acute anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 45% or less were randomly allocated to 2 study arms between October 26, 2017, and September 21, 2020. Interventions: Patients in the experimental arm received 20 mg of paroxetine daily; patients in the control group received a placebo daily. Both treatments were provided for 12 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the difference in patient-level improvement of LVEF between baseline and 12 weeks as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance tomography. Secondary end points were changes in left ventricular dimensions and late gadolinium enhancement between baseline and follow-up. Results: Fifty patients (mean [SD] age, 62 [13] years; 41 men [82%]) with acute anterior myocardial infarction were randomly allocated to paroxetine or placebo, of whom 38 patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging both at baseline and 12 weeks. There was no difference in recovery of LVEF between the experimental group (mean [SD] change, 4.0% [7.0%]) and the control group (mean [SD] change, 6.3% [6.3%]; mean difference, -2.4% [95% CI, -6.8% to 2.1%]; P = .29) or changes in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (mean difference, 13.4 [95% CI, -12.3 to 39.0] mL; P = .30) and end-systolic volume (mean difference, 11.4 [95% CI, -3.6 to 26.4] mL; P = .13). Late gadolinium enhancement as a percentage of the total left ventricular mass decreased to a larger extent in the experimental group (mean [SD], -13.6% [12.9%]) compared with the control group (mean [SD], -4.5% [9.5%]; mean difference, -9.1% [95% CI, -16.6% to -1.6%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, treatment with paroxetine did not improve LVEF after myocardial infarction compared with placebo. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03274752.