ArticleJMIR research protocols2026
Frequency, Clinical Characteristics, Anatomical Distribution, and Outcomes of Embolic Complications of Cardiac Myxoma in Contemporary Cohorts: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiac myxomas (CMs) are the commonest benign primary cardiac tumors, most frequently originating from the left atrium and occasionally from the right atrium. Despite being histologically benign, CMs can cause myriad serious embolic complications, including stroke, acute coronary syndrome, limb ischemia, and visceral infarction. While previous studies have explored risk factors for embolization, there is a lack of papers comprehensively summarizing the frequency, anatomical distribution, clinical patterns, and management of CM-related embolization. Objective: This review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis of embolic complications associated with CMs, highlighting patterns, management strategies, and gaps in the current literature. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed will be searched for studies reporting embolic complications in patients with histologically or radiologically confirmed CMs. Eligible study designs include large case series, cohort studies, and registries. Six reviewers will independently perform title and abstract and full-text screening in pairs across 3 screening groups, with disagreements resolved through discussion and senior reviewer adjudication where necessary. Data will be extracted by 3 reviewers, with the extracted data independently verified for accuracy. Discrepancies will be resolved through discussion or third-party adjudication. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Results: The review will summarize reported frequencies and anatomical distribution of embolic events, clinical presentations, associations with tumor characteristics, and management strategies. Title and abstract screening were completed in early April 2026, and full-text screening commenced in late April 2026. Data extraction and synthesis were completed in May 2026. We anticipate publication of the findings in September 2026. Conclusions: This review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis of embolic complications associated with CMs, highlighting patterns, management strategies, and gaps in the current literature. The findings aim to improve clinical recognition, inform clinical management, and guide future research.
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.