ReviewCJC open2025
Intussusception of the Left Atrial Appendage: A Systematic Review.
Review in CJC open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intussusception of the left atrial appendage (LAA) is an uncommon and often underrecognized finding; poor knowledge of this condition is still widespread in clinical practice. A systematic review was carried out to provide a comprehensive and updated overview on this condition. Methods: A bibliographic search using major databases resulted in 25 case reports meeting the criteria. Included records reported data from patients aged > 18 years with a diagnosis of LAA intussusception, determined either intraoperatively or incidentally by imaging tools, and findings on baseline demographics, clinical findings, imaging diagnostic workup, and management. Results: For the 25 patients included, the median age was 54 years, with a predominance of female sex (53%). Most of intussuscepted LAA cases were disclosed intraoperatively (60%) or incidentally by imaging tools (20%) in the absence of associated clinical findings. All reported cases underwent transoesophageal echocardiography, and in most, LAA intussusception was confirmed by intraoperative inspection (44%) or further imaging (23%). In most cases, LAA intussusception was resolved interventionally (60%). In fewer subjects, LAA eversion occurred spontaneously (32%), and in the remaining cases, a conservative approach was adopted (8%). Conclusions: This study presents the largest systematic review to date of an adult patient population with a diagnosis of intussuscepted LAA. Regardless of the various etiologies and clinical manifestations associated with LAA intussusception, physicians should be aware of the possibility of this rare entity, to provide timely recognition and thereby avoid misleading diagnoses and enable appropriate decision-making.
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.