Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 31;12(2):2183.
doi: 10.4022/jafib.2183. eCollection 2019 Aug-Sep.

Left Atrial Appendage Morphology as a Determinant for Stroke Risk Assessment in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abu Rmilah Anan  1 , Jumah Fareed  2 , Jaber Suhaib  3 , Roubi Rafat  4 , Daana Murad  4 , Bsisu Isam  5 , Muamar Tariq  6 , Erwin Patricia  1 , Egbe Alexander  1 , Vaibha Vaidya  1 , Noseworthy Peter A  1 , Deshmukh Abhishek  1
Affiliations

Left Atrial Appendage Morphology as a Determinant for Stroke Risk Assessment in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abu Rmilah Anan et al. J Atr Fibrillation. .

Abstract

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a leading source of emboli that precipitate cerebrovascular accident (CVA) which is correlated with left atrial appendage (LAA) morphology. We aimed to elaborate the relationship between CVA and LAA morphology in AF patients.

Methods: Medline and EMBASE databases were thoroughly searched between 2010-2018 for studies that included atrial fibrillation patients and classified them into two groups based on CVA occurrence. Four different LAA morphologies (Chicken wing CW, Cauliflower, cactus and windsock) were determined in each group by 3D TEE, MDCT or CMRI. New Castle Ottawa Scale was used to appraise the quality of included studies. The risk of CVA before cardiac ablation and/or LAA intervention in CW patients was compared to each type of non-CW morphologies. The extracted data was statistically analyzed in the form of forest plot by measuring the risk ratio (RR) using REVMAN software. P value and I square were used to assess the heterogeneity between studies.

Results: PRISMA diagram was illustrated showing 789 imported studies for screening. Three duplicates were removed, and the rest were arbitrated by 2 reviewers yielding 12 included studies with 3486 patients including 1551 with CW, 442 with cauliflower, 732 with cactus 765 with windsock. The risk of CVA in CW patients was reduced by 41% relative to non-CW patients (Total RR=0.59 (0.52-0.68)). Likewise, the risk of CVA in CW patients was less by 46%, 35% and 31% compared to cauliflower (Total RR =0.54(0.46-0.64)), cactus (Total RR =0.65(0.55-0.77)) and windsock (Total RR =0.69(0.58-0.83)) patients respectively. Low levels of heterogeneity were achieved in all comparisons (I square <35% and p value > 0.1).

Conclusions: Patients with non-CW morphologies (cauliflower, cactus and windsock) show a higher incidence of CVA than CW patients. For that reason, LAA appendage morphology could be useful for risk stratification of CVA in AF patients.

Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; Left atrial appendage; Stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. The PRISMA flow diagram and summarizes the process search strategy.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Forest plot compares the risk of cardioembolic events (stroke, TIA) between CW patients and non-CW patients.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Forest plot compares the risk of cardioembolic events (stroke, TIA) between CW patients and cauliflower patients.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. Forest plot compares the risk of cardioembolic events (stroke, TIA) between CW patients and cactus patients.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Forest plot compares the risk of cardioembolic events (stroke, TIA) between CW patients and windsockpatients.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.. Funnels plots for detecting the publication bias for all comparisons.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Go A S, Hylek E M, Phillips K A, Chang Y, Henault L E, Selby J V, Singer D E. Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study. JAMA. 2001 May 09;285 (18):2370–5. - PubMed
    1. Chugh S S, Blackshear J L, Shen W K, Hammill S C, Gersh B J. Epidemiology and natural history of atrial fibrillation: clinical implications. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2001 Feb;37 (2):371–8. - PubMed
    1. Feinberg W M, Blackshear J L, Laupacis A, Kronmal R, Hart R G. Prevalence, age distribution, and gender of patients with atrial fibrillation. Analysis and implications. Arch. Intern. Med. 1995 Mar 13;155 (5):469–73. - PubMed
    1. Patel Nileshkumar J, Deshmukh Abhishek, Pant Sadip, Singh Vikas, Patel Nilay, Arora Shilpkumar, Shah Neeraj, Chothani Ankit, Savani Ghanshyambhai T, Mehta Kathan, Parikh Valay, Rathod Ankit, Badheka Apurva O, Lafferty James, Kowalski Marcin, Mehta Jawahar L, Mitrani Raul D, Viles-Gonzalez Juan F, Paydak Hakan. Contemporary trends of hospitalization for atrial fibrillation in the United States, 2000 through 2010: implications for healthcare planning. Circulation. 2014 Jun 10;129 (23):2371–9. - PubMed
    1. Wolf P A, Abbott R D, Kannel W B. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study. Stroke. 1991 Aug;22 (8):983–8. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources