ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2024
Catheter based left atrial appendage closure in-hospital outcomes in Germany from 2016 to 2020.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Next Frontiers in Stroke Prevention: Optimizing Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Atrial Fibrillation: Current Devices, Imaging-Guided Strategies, and Emerging Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Left atrial appendage occlusion: trends in demographics and in-hospital outcomes-a German nationwide analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Observational
- TF-TAVI and SAVR post-procedural complications in Germany 2021/2022 - impact on healthcare resource consumption.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Procedural safety of rotational atherectomy and modified balloon angioplasty: insights from a German national registry.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Clinical and subclinical acute brain injury caused by invasive cardiovascular procedures.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Reweighting and validation of the hospital frailty risk score using electronic health records in Germany: a retrospective observational study.BMC geriatrics · 2024Observational
- Comment on Grundmann et al. "Prognostic impact and diagnostic value of invasively derived hemodynamic measures in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI".Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNew and refined catheter based left atrial appendage (LAA) closure devices have been introduced in the past decade. The procedure can be performed using either an endocardial occlusion device or an epicardial loop stitch. We aimed to analyzed recent procedural safety.
methodsCatheter based LAA closures were identified in a complete nationwide German dataset via ICD and OPS codes from 2016 to 2020.
resultsFrom 2016 to 2020, 28,039 endocardial and 213 epicardial occlusions were performed. Numbers of endocardial procedures increased from 5259 in 2016 to 5917 in 2020 (p = 0.020) in 387 centers with shifting of patients' characteristics towards older age (β = 0.29, p < 0.001), more heart failure (β = 1.01, p < 0.001) and renal disease (β = 0.67, p = 0.001) and without a significant trend for in-hospital safety except more bleeding (β = 0.12, p = 0.05). In-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) or pericardial puncture were independent on center procedure numbers. The loop stitch procedure was performed in 15 centers. Patients were younger (76.17 ± 8.16 vs. 73.16 ± 8.99, p < 0.001) and had a lower comorbidity index (2.29 ± 1.93 vs. 1.92 ± 1.64, p = 0.005). Adjusted risk difference for pericardial effusion (8.04%; 95% CI 3.01-13.08%; p = 0.002) and pericardial puncture (6.60%; 95% CI 3.85-9.35%; p < 0.001) was higher for the loop stitch procedure, while risk of bleeding (- 1.85%; 95% CI - 3.01 to - 0.69%; p = 0.002), intracerebral bleeding (- 0.37%; 95% CI - 0.59 to - 0.15%; p = 0.001) and shock (- 1.41%; 95% CI - 2.44 to - 0.39%; p = 0.007) was lower. No significant difference was observed for in-hospital MACCE.
conclusionsEndocardial occlusion was the major catheter based LAA closure procedure in Germany without improvements in in-hospital safety from 2016 to 2020. In-hospital MACCE was independent on endocardial LAAC center volumes. Conclusions on the comparison between the two procedure types must be made cautious as the LAA loop stitch occlusion was utilized limited in a minor number of centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.