Stroke Prevention With Prophylactic Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Cardiac Surgery Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Propensity-Score Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in patients without previous atrial fibrillation (AF) is not established. This meta-analysis was conducted on patients with normal sinus rhythm who underwent cardiac surgery, with and without concomitant LAAO, to evaluate its effect on the incidence of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted from inception until December 2023 for randomized and propensity-score studies comparing CVA in patients without AF undergoing cardiac surgery with or without LAAO. RESULTS: Six studies met our inclusion criteria with a total of 4130 patients: 2146 in the LAAO group and 1984 in the no-LAAO group. The risk ratio of postoperative AF was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.86–1.28); P =0.628. The CVA rates at 5 years were 6.8±1.0% in the no-LAAO group and 4.3±0.8% in the LAAO group (log-rank P =0.021). The Cox regression analysis for CVA in patients undergoing LAAO reported a hazard ratio of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.45–0.94); P =0.022. Landmark analysis at 4 years highlighted a significant difference in overall survival between no-LAAO and LAAO groups, 86±12.2% versus 89.6±11.0%; P =0.041. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of patients without previous AF undergoing cardiac surgery, LAAO was associated with a decreased risk of CVA, no difference in the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation, and a significant overall survival benefit at a 4-year landmark analysis. Although these findings support LAAO, the randomized LeAAPS trial (Left Atrial Appendage Exclusion for Prophylactic Stroke Reduction Trial), LAA-CLOSURE trial (A Randomized Prospective Multicenter Trial for Stroke Prevention by Prophylactic Surgical Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage in Patients Undergoing Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Surgery), and LAACS-2 trial (Left Atrial Appendage Closure by Surgery-2) will help define the effectiveness of LAAO in patients undergoing cardiac surgery who have risk factors for AF and CVA. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ ; Unique identifier: CRD42024496366.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".