ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Impact of occluder device configurations in in-silico left atrial hemodynamics for the analysis of device-related thrombus.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual left atrial appendage occlusion in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during sinus rhythm predicts variable reductions in blood stasis.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Digital twin integrating clinical, morphological and hemodynamic data to identify stroke risk factors.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation: shaping the future of stroke prevention.Future cardiology · 2025Review
- Advancements in 3D Transoesophageal Echocardiography (TOE) and Computed Tomography (CT) for Stroke Prevention in Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- 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.
Funding
Abstract
Left atrial appendage occlusion devices (LAAO) are a feasible alternative for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at high risk of thromboembolic stroke and contraindication to antithrombotic therapies. However, optimal LAAO device configurations (i.e., size, type, location) remain unstandardized due to the large anatomical variability of the left atrial appendage (LAA) morphology, leading to a 4-6% incidence of device-related thrombus (DRT). In-silico simulations have the potential to assess DRT risk and identify the key factors, such as suboptimal device positioning. This work presents fluid simulation results computed on 20 patient-specific left atrial geometries, analysing different commercially available LAAO occluders, including plug-type and pacifier-type devices. In addition, we explored two distinct device positions: 1) the real post-LAAO intervention configuration derived from follow-up imaging; and 2) one covering the pulmonary ridge if it was not achieved during the implantation (13 out of 20). In total, 33 different configurations were analysed. In-silico indices indicating high risk of DRT (e.g., low blood flow velocities and flow complexity around the device) were combined with particle deposition analysis based on a discrete phase model. The obtained results revealed that covering the pulmonary ridge with the LAAO device may be one of the key factors to prevent DRT, resulting in higher velocities and reduced flow recirculations (e.g., mean velocities of 0.183 ± 0.12 m/s and 0.236 ± 0.16 m/s for uncovered versus covered positions in DRT patients). Moreover, disk-based devices exhibited enhanced adaptability to various LAA morphologies and, generally, demonstrated a lower risk of abnormal events after LAAO implantation.
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.