Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyMeta-analysis
Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Patency After Device Closure Detected by Cardiac Computed Tomography (CT)
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bayesian meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
LAA patency and PDL identified by CT may be associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism.
Study context
- Population
- Patients after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with follow-up cardiac CT
- Participants
- 2,036 patients · 17 studies
- Comparison
- Residual left atrial appendage (LAA) patency or PDL on cardiac CT vs no residual leak after LAAO
- Outcome
- Thromboembolism
- Follow-up
- During
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Each group vs no leakPooled odds ratio (95% CI)
LAA patency28 (95% CI: 3-68) additional events per 1,000 patients
1.87(1.08–3.24)
PDLnot significant
1.50(0.85–2.65)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | median OR (95% CrI CrI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Thromboembolism, Bayesian analysis (noninformative prior) — LAA patency vs No leak · mean logOR 0.59 (95% CrI 0.06-1.15) · CrI | 1.87 (1.06–3.14) | |
| Thromboembolism, Bayesian analysis (noninformative prior) — PDL vs No leak · mean logOR 0.38 (95% CrI −0.22 to 0.95) · CrI | 1.53 (0.80–2.59) | |
| 0.20.5125Median odds ratio (log scale) |
| Outcome | mean ARD (95% CrI CrI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Thromboembolism, Bayesian analysis (noninformative prior) — LAA patency vs No leak · posterior probability of ARD >0%: 98.5% · CrI | 2.8% (0.2%–6.8%) | |
| Thromboembolism, Bayesian analysis (noninformative prior) — PDL vs No leak · posterior probability of ARD >0%: 89.8% · CrI | 1.9% (−0.7% to 5.4%) | |
| −50510Difference (linear scale) |
Original publication
Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Patency After Device Closure Detected by Cardiac CT. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Published 8 September 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2025.07.018
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it