ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Efficacy and safety of concomitant catheter ablation and left atrial appendage closure compared to catheter ablation only - a meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 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
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) carries a substantial ischemic stroke risk originating predominantly from the left atrial appendage (LAA). Catheter ablation (CA) is the most effective rhythm-control strategy, while percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC) provides mechanical stroke prophylaxis. Combining both in a single one-stop procedure is increasingly performed, yet data on its rhythmic and periprocedural consequences remain scarce.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of combined CA + LAAC versus CA-only in patients with AF. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 12th 2026. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were arrhythmia recurrence and periprocedural pericardial effusion requiring drainage, respectively. Binary endpoints were pooled as odds ratios (OR), continuous endpoints as mean differences (MD), using a random-effects model with heterogeneity reported as I
resultsFourteen studies comprising 3,274 patients (1,505 CA + LAAC; 1,769 CA-only) were included. Arrhythmia recurrence was significantly more frequent after combined CA + LAAC (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.11-2.19, I
conclusionCombined CA + LAAC was associated with significantly higher arrhythmia recurrence than CA-only, potentially attributable to limited substrate modification in the one-stop setting. The primary safety outcome, pericardial effusion requiring drainage, did not differ between groups. Randomised controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42606798What 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.