ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Comparison of prognosis and analysis of related risk factors among three different left atrial appendage occlusion procedures in patients with atrial fibrillation.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) serves as an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at high risk of bleeding. The aim of this study was to compare the peri-procedural safety, complete or incomplete occlusion, the incidence of the peri-device leak (PDL), and device-related thrombosis (DRT) among LAAO, cryoballoon ablation (CBA) combined with LAAO, and radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) combined with LAAO and to explore the risk factors of PDL and incomplete occlusion. Methods: 382 patients with non-valvular AF who underwent either LAAO alone ( Results: Peri-procedural complication rates were low among all groups, with 2.9% in the RFCA combined with the LAAO group. In contrast, the LAAO alone and CBA combined with LAAO groups reported no major complications ( Conclusion: Peri-procedural complications, complete occlusion, PDL, and DRT rates were similar across the three treatment strategies. Persistent AF and SCr were significant risk factors for incomplete occlusion and PDL. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment strategies based on patient-specific risk factors for optimizing outcomes.
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.