ArticleCardio-oncology (London, England)2026
Outcomes associated with left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with cancer-associated atrial fibrillation: a real-world propensity-matched analysis.
Article in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a common comorbidity in cancer patients, increasing their risk of stroke and mortality. Cancer patients are often excluded from risk stratification models such as HAS-BLED and CHA₂DS₂-VASc, which may underestimate AF-related risks. Additionally, oral anticoagulation in this population increases bleeding risk. This study evaluated the role of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in cancer patients with AF.
methodsTriNetX, a global federated health research network, was used to identify cancer patients with AF, with and without LAAO, from 2015 to 2023. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed for age, race, sex, comorbidities, and medication use, generating two equal cohorts of 1,228 patients. The primary endpoint was major bleeding; the secondary endpoints were ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality. Secondary analyses compared LAAO with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin.
resultsAmong 2,456 matched AF patients, 1,228 underwent LAAO. LAAO was correlated with significantly lower major bleeding at 3 months (26.4% vs. 33.0%, p < 0.001), with similar trends at 1 year (p = 0.019) and 3 years (p = 0.005). Compared to warfarin, LAAO had lower major bleeding (p = 0.006); rates were similar to DOACs (p = 0.356). Ischemic stroke rates were not significantly different between groups at any time point. LAAO recipients exhibited lower mortality at 3 months (3.6% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.0001), 1 year (11.1% vs. 29.7%, p < 0.001), and 3 years (23.5% vs. 36.9%, p < 0.001). Mortality was also lower in LAAO recipients compared with DOAC (p < 0.001) and warfarin (p < 0.001) groups. In adjusted Cox models, LAAO remained associated with significantly lower mortality (adjusted HR 0.63), while adjusted risks of major bleeding and ischemic stroke did not differ between groups.
conclusionsIn cancer patients with AF, LAAO was correlated with lower major bleeding and mortality in matched analyses, while stroke rates were similar. In adjusted Cox models, LAAO remained correlated with lower mortality, whereas bleeding and stroke risks were not significantly different. These findings should be interpreted in the context of real-world treatment selection and the absence of granular data on cancer stage, disease activity, timing of LAAO, and cause-specific mortality.
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.