ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Perioperative outcome of left atrial appendage amputation in coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeft atrial appendage (LAA) amputation performed alongside cardiac surgery has become an increasingly established procedure to reduce stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. As the recommendation levels for LAA amputation continue to rise, ample evidence assessing its perioperative safety and risk factors is of utmost interest.
methodsAll patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2018 and 2021 at two high-volume centers were retrospectively included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups-the CABG and CABG + LAA groups-based on whether they underwent concomitant LAA amputation. Propensity score matching (PS matching) was applied to ensure comparability between the groups. The primary endpoint was defined as a composite outcome comprising of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included the components of the primary endpoint, perioperative outcome parameters, transfusion rates, and laboratory parameters.
resultsA total of 3904 patients were included with 3038 and 866 in the CABG and CABG + LAA group, respectively. After PS matching each group consisted of 856 patients. The primary endpoint showed no significant differences between the CABG and CABG + LAA group (7.0% vs. 6.5% (OR 0.9 95% CI [0.64; 1.35], p = 0.70)). Similarly, there were no notable differences in the individual components of the composite endpoint: all-cause mortality (p = 0.84), stroke (p = 0.74), and reoperation (p = 0.50). Subgroup results did not show any relevant dissimilarity.
conclusionThe concomitant performance of LAA amputation is not associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, as measured by the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reoperation.
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.