ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
A comparable efficacy and safety between intracardiac echocardiography and transesophageal echocardiography for percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intracardiac Echocardiography during Invasive Electrophysiological Procedures: a Scientific Statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the ESC, and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions of the ESC.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026Guideline
- Intracardiac or transesophageal echocardiography for left atrial appendage occlusion: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Pooled it
- Intracardiac vs. Transesophageal echocardiography in left atrial appendage occlusion: real-world comparative effectiveness from a propensity-matched cohort.Cardiovascular ultrasound · 2026Article
- Safety and Feasibility of a Novel Split Design Left Atrial Appendage Occluder: From Preclinical Investigations to First-in-Human Application.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2026Article
- Intracardiac echocardiography versus transesophageal echocardiography guidance on left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Supporting Evidence, Limitations and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accumulated clinical studies utilized intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) to guide percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). However, its procedural success and safety compared to traditional transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) remained elusive. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety of ICE and TEE for LAAO. Methods: We screened studies from four online databases (including the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science) from their inception to 1 December 2022. We used a random or fixed-effect model to synthesize the clinical outcomes and conducted a subgroup analysis to identify the potential confounding factors. Results: A total of twenty eligible studies with 3,610 atrial fibrillation (AF) patients (1,564 patients for ICE and 2,046 patients for TEE) were enrolled. Compared with TEE group, there was no significant difference in procedural success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1.01; Conclusion: Our study suggests that ICE may have comparable efficacy and safety compared to TEE for LAAO.
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.