ArticleThe Canadian journal of cardiology2009
Therapeutic options in coronary artery disease: focusing on the guidelines.
Article in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns and determinants of treatment for coronary artery disease: A cross-sectional study in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.Saudi medical journal · 2021Article
- Coronary revascularization in the elderly with stable angina.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2015Review
- The incidence of renal artery stenosis in the patients referred for coronary artery bypass grafting.Indian journal of nephrology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are three options for the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease: coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and optimal medical treatment alone. While there has been an active interface between CABG and PCI, medical treatment has not been as vociferously advocated. However, it performs well in randomized trials and is still a treatment arm in studies such as the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. The present review compares these options in acute and chronic coronary syndromes, including the indications for each as summarized by recent American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines. While the landscape in Canada is changing for CABG and PCI, with an increase in the latter procedure for patients with multivessel disease, optimal medical treatment alone is very effective. There are few subsets, particularly in chronic syndromes, in which revascularization is indicated for prognosis alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.