ArticleYonsei medical journal2022
A Comparative Study of Three Imaging Modalities for Size Selection of a Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Left Atrial Appendage Characteristics Assessed with Cardiac Computed Tomography in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Severe Mitral Valve Disease.Yonsei medical journal · 2025Article
- Risk factors of incomplete endothelialization after left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Percutaneous and Surgical Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- The effect of two different methods of planning landing zone for left atrial appendage closure by cardiac computed tomography angiography: a comparative study.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the results of computed tomography angiography (CTA), transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) measurements and analyze their accuracy, correlation, and consistency in patients who have successfully undergone left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 157 non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who underwent LAAC with Watchman devices were included in the study. The maximum diameter and depth of LAA were recorded using CTA, TEE, and DSA. Correlations and agreements were compared.
resultsThe LAAC procedure was performed successfully in all patients using the Watchman device. There was no significant difference between DSA and TEE measurements of the diameter of the LAA ostium. LAA ostium diameter obtained by CTA, however, was greater than that from DSA and TEE. Correlations were good between LAA ostium diameter measured by TEE, CTA, and DSA and Watchman device size. DSA measurements and actual device size showed the widest limits of agreement, followed by TEE; CTA measurements showed the narrowest limits of agreement. For LAA depth measurements, mean CTA measurements were higher than those of TEE and DSA. There was no significant difference in depth measurements among the three imaging modalities.
conclusionCTA, TEE, and DSA measurements exhibited good correlations with Watchman device size. The ostium diameter and depth of the LAA measured by CTA were greater than those measured by TEE and DSA. The relevance and concordance of CTA measurements were the strongest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.