ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2023
Comparison of different quantitative evaluation protocols for peri-device leak detection using cardiac computed tomography angiography after left atrial appendage closure.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving cardiac computed tomography angiography image quality and diagnostic confidence for atrial fibrillation after left atrial appendage closure using a second-generation whole-heart motion correction algorithm.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study seeks to propose and compare different quantitative evaluation methods for identifying patients with peri-device leak (PDL) using cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Patients who had undergone left atrial appendage (LAA) closure and both transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and CCTA were enrolled. Hounsfield units (HU) were measured in the proximal and distal regions of the left atrial appendage (p-LAA, d-LAA) on the CCTA, and the average of the two was determined (a-LAA). The relative HU ratios of the LAA to the center of the left atrium (LA) were calculated (p-LAA/c-LA, d-LAA/c-LA, a-LAA/c-LA). The area under the curve (AUC) for the LAA HU and the LAA/LA HU ratio were analyzed and compared. Fifty-one patients were included in this study. Pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.029) in diagnostic performance between the d-LAA (AUC = 0.868) and a-LAA (AUC = 0.972). There were no significant differences between the a-LAA and p-LAA (p = 0.549) or between the d-LAA and p-LAA (p = 0.053). At the optimal cutoff for a-LAA of 115.5 HU, the sensitivity was 100%, the specificity was 88%. At the optimal cutoff for p-LAA of 109 HU, the sensitivity was 100%, the specificity was 84%. The LAA/LA HU ratio did not exhibit better diagnostic performance than HU attenuation in the LAA (p > 0.05). The a-LAA > 115.5 is useful in identifying PDL. Due to its convenience and intuitiveness, p-LAA > 109.0 can also be used as an alternative protocol for a-LAA.
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.