ArticleAsiaIntervention2018
Safety and feasibility of interventional left atrial appendage closure without contrast agent.
Article in AsiaIntervention, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Interventional left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is routinely performed under both echocardiographic and angiographic guiding. However, adverse outcomes, e.g., kidney injury and cerebral embolism, might be associated with injections of contrast agent into the LAA. Therefore, this prospective registry investigated the safety and feasibility of LAAC without the support of angiographic images as the default approach. Methods and results: This single-centre registry included a total of 46 non-selected, consecutive patients. In the first 25 patients (54%), LAAC with the Amulet device was performed routinely with LAA angiography prior to implantation and after release of the device. The following 21 patients (46%) were treated without the use of contrast agent. The combination of successful implantation and lack of procedural complications was regarded as the primary endpoint. Procedure time, number of recapture manoeuvres, change of device size, compression, leakage, dose area product and late thrombosis on the device were investigated as secondary endpoints. Besides the longer fluoroscopy time and duration of the procedure in the group using angiography, no significant differences could be found. Major complications occurred equally often in both cohorts. Conclusions: Interventional LAAC with the Amulet device can be performed safely without the use of contrast agent. This approach might help to enhance the use of LAAC in patients at high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy and procedural stroke.
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.