ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly >75 Years Old: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epicardial Ligation of the Left Atrial Appendage in Octogenarians: Safety and Long-Term Efficacy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
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
Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an established therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there is a limited understanding of LAAC in elderly patients (≥75 years old). We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the procedural complications and long-term outcomes after LAAC in the elderly versus the non-elderly. Methods: We screened PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Procedural endpoints of interest included successful implantation LAAC rates, in-hospital mortality, major bleeding events, pericardial effusion/tamponade, stroke, and vascular access complications related to LAAC. Long-term outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding events, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) during follow-up. Results: Finally, 12 studies were included in the analysis; these included a total of 25,094 people in the elderly group and 36,035 people in the non-elderly group. The successful implantation LAAC rates did not differ between the groups, while the elderly patients experienced more periprocedural mortality (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.79−3.83, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), pericardial effusion/tamponade (OR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.06−1.82, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), major bleeding events (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.17−1.48, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), and vascular access complications (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.16−1.55, p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) than the non-elderly patients. The long-term stroke/TIA rates did not differ between the elderly and the non-elderly at least one year after follow-up. Conclusions: Even though successful implantation LAAC rates are similar, elderly patients have a significantly higher incidence of periprocedural mortality, major bleeding events, vascular access complications, and pericardial effusion/tamponade after LAAC than non-elderly patients. The stroke/TIA rates did not differ between both groups after at least one-year follow-up.
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.