ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Concomitant left atrial appendage exclusion during cardiac surgery: a single-center case series on technique profile, residual flow, and early safety.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConcomitant left atrial appendage exclusion is increasingly performed during cardiac surgery in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, real-world data on procedural variations, closure integrity, and early safety are limited.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 86 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent concomitant left atrial appendage exclusion during cardiac surgery at a single center between 2012 and 2025. Nineteen patients underwent left atrial appendage occlusion using suture-based techniques or a closure device, and 67 underwent left atrial appendage resection with closure using sutures or a stapler. Residual flow was assessed using intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, and outcomes were evaluated during follow-up.
resultsPatients in the occlusion group more often had longer atrial fibrillation duration, vitamin K antagonist use, and previous cardiac surgery. Mitral valve procedures were more frequently combined with occlusion, whereas maze ablation was more common in the resection group. Intraoperative residual flow was detected in three patients (16%) after occlusion and in none after resection. Both approaches showed favorable early safety, with no 30-day mortality and low reoperation rates due to bleeding. Differences in sinus rhythm and anticoagulation at three months were observed, but were likely influenced by concomitant maze procedures. Differences in long-term survival were also observed but should be interpreted cautiously because of baseline imbalances and unequal follow-up duration.
conclusionsIn this single-center retrospective case series, suture-based occlusion was associated with residual flow in a subset of patients, whereas no residual flow was detected after resection using intraoperative echocardiography. Both approaches showed acceptable early safety. Larger multicenter studies with standardized follow-up imaging are needed to clarify closure durability and the long-term clinical 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.