ArticleHeart and vessels2019
Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in patients over 75 years.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3-Year outcomes after left atrial appendage closure in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: cardiomyopathy related with increased death and stroke rate.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Trial
- Review
- Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and risk of stroke, hospitalized bleeding and death in Medicare beneficiaries.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2024Article
- Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly >75 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis of Observational StudiesDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical benefit of left atrial appendage closure in octogenarians.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2021Article
- Impact of sex differences on outcomes in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation undergoing left atrial appendage closure: A single-center experience.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may decrease risks of stroke and bleeding in elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but it is still lacking of evidence. The present study aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of LAAC in patients with NVAF over 75 years. 351 patients with NVAF who underwent LAAC were retrospectively analyzed on the LAAC procedure characteristics and the clinical follow-up according to age (age ≥ 75 years or < 75 years). Out of the 351 patients, LAA were successfully closed in 347 patients (98.9%), including 341 with Watchman (WM) device and 6 with Amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP) device because of the WM device-incompatible anatomy. There were no significant differences in total LAAC success rate and procedure-related major complications within 7 days between the groups aged ≥ 75 years and aged < 75 years. After a nearly 2-year follow-up, there was an increased trend of major bleedings and all bleedings in the group aged ≥ 75 years, but there were no significant differences between both groups in all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke/TIA/system embolism, device thrombus and device gap (> 5 mm). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the relative risk of annual thromboembolic events between the observed values and the expected ones based on CHA
Indexed as
Identifiers
31144099What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.