ArticleCardiology2025
Long-Term Outcome of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and High Risk of Stroke Treated with Oral Anticoagulation or Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: A Cardinality Matched Analysis.
Article in Cardiology, 2025. 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
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) poses a significant risk of stroke. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative for patients with contraindications to oral anticoagulation (OAC) or with high risk of bleeding. This study aims to compare the outcomes of LAAO versus conventional stroke prevention in high-risk AF-patients.
methodsThis secondary analysis incorporates data from the prospective Swiss-AF and Beat-AF cohorts, and the Zurich LAAO Registry. Cardinality matching was performed to create two comparable cohorts: conventional treatment (92% OAC) and LAAO. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, cardiovascular (CV) death, and clinically relevant bleeding. Kaplan-Meier method with competing risk analysis was used.
resultsEach group included 468 patients (age 76.4 [70.5, 82.0] years, 33% female). The LAAO group exhibited higher baseline bleeding risk (HAS BLED 2.0 [1.0-3.0] versus 3.0 [3.0-4.0]; p < 0.001). Median follow-up time: 6.0 (4.7-7.0) years in conventional treatment group and 4.0 (1.5-6.1) in LAAO group. No significant difference in the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.72-1.06, p = 0.18), stroke risk (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.66-1.97, p = 0.64), or CV mortality (HR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.82-1.42, p = 0.60) was observed between groups. LAAO correlated with a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding (HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.47-0.80, p < 0.001).
conclusionIn this cardinality matched analysis with long-term follow-up, LAAO showed similar stroke and CV death rates but lower clinically relevant bleeding risk compared to conventional therapy in high-risk AF-patients.
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.