ArticleStroke and vascular neurology2025
Left atrial appendage closure for patients with atrial fibrillation at high intracranial haemorrhagic risk.
Article in Stroke and vascular neurology, 2025. 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.
- Update on left atrial appendage closure for neurologists.European stroke journal · 2026Review
- Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAlthough left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is performed in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) at increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), outcome data are scarce. We assessed the detailed neurological indications for LAAC and outcomes after LAAC in high ICH risk patients.
methodsStudy population included consecutive patients with NVAF who underwent LAAC in a single hospital network between January 2015 and October 2021 because of prior ICH or the presence of high ICH risk imaging markers on brain MRI (cerebral microbleeds (CMBs)). Primary safety and efficacy outcome measures were the occurrence of ICH and thromboembolic events, respectively, after LAAC.
resultsAmong 146 patients with NVAF who underwent LAAC for high ICH risk, 122 had a history of ICH, while 24 presented with high ICH risk imaging markers only. Mean age was 75.7±7.61, 42 (28.8%) were women. Mean CHA
conclusionsAmong patients with NVAF at high ICH risk, LAAC demonstrated a low risk of recurrent ICH or ischaemic stroke compared with previously published data. LAAC in high ICH risk populations should be considered in clinical practice per FDA approval and recent guidelines.
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.