Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24754891›Full record

Trial reportTrials2014

Endoscopic versus open radial artery harvest and mammario-radial versus aorto-radial grafting in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: protocol for the 2 × 2 factorial designed randomised NEO trial.

Christian L Carranza, Martin Ballegaard, Mads U Werner, Philip Hasbak, Andreas Kjær, Klaus F Kofoed, Jane Lindschou, Janus Christian Jakobsen, Christian Gluud, Peter Skov Olsen and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01848886 (Endoscopic Versus Open Radial Artery Harvest and Mammario-radial Versus Aorto-radial Grafting in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01848886 nacompletednot on this map

Endoscopic Versus Open Radial Artery Harvest and Mammario-radial Versus Aorto-radial Grafting in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (The 2x2 Factorial Designed Randomised NEO Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorRigshospitalet, DenmarkRan2013 to 2020Enrolled301ConditionsComplications Due to Coronary Artery Bypass Graft, Coronary Artery Disease, Myocardial Ischemia, Coronary DiseaseArmsEndoscopic radial artery harvest, Open radial artery harvest, Mammarioradial graft (Y-graft), Aortoradial graft (Free RA)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christian L CarranzaDepartment of Cardio-thoracic Surgery, The Heart Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. christian@thoraxkir.dk.
Martin Ballegaard
Mads U Werner
Philip Hasbak
Andreas Kjær
Klaus F Kofoed
Jane Lindschou
Janus Christian Jakobsen
Christian Gluud
Peter Skov Olsen
Daniel A Steinbrüchel
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKRigshospitalet · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronary artery bypass grafting using the radial artery has, since the 1990s, gone through a revival. Observational studies have indicated better long-term patency when using radial arteries. Therefore, radial artery might be preferred especially in younger patients where long time patency is important. During the last 10 years different endoscopic techniques to harvest the radial artery have evolved. Endoscopic radial artery harvest only requires a small incision near the wrist in contrast to open harvest, which requires an incision from the elbow to the wrist. However, it is unknown whether the endoscopic technique results in fewer complications or a graft patency comparable to open harvest. When the radial artery has been harvested, there are two ways to use the radial artery as a graft. One way is sewing it onto the aorta and another is sewing it onto the mammary artery. It is unknown which technique is the superior revascularisation technique. METHODS/

designThe NEO Trial is a randomised clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. We plan to randomise 300 participants into four intervention groups: (1) mammario-radial endoscopic group; (2) aorto-radial endoscopic group; (3) mammario-radial open surgery group; and (4) aorto-radial open surgery group.The hand function will be assessed by a questionnaire, a clinical examination, the change in cutaneous sensibility, and the measurement of both sensory and motor nerve conduction velocity at 3 months postoperatively. All the postoperative complications will be registered, and we will evaluate muscular function, scar appearance, vascular supply to the hand, and the graft patency including the patency of the central radial artery anastomosis. A patency evaluation by multi-slice computer tomography will be done at one year postoperatively.We expect the nerve conduction studies and the standardised neurological examinations to be able to discriminate differences in hand function comparing endoscopic to open harvest of the radial artery. The trial also aims to show if there is any patency difference between mammario-radial compared to aorto-radial revascularisation techniques but this objective is exploratory.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01848886.Danish Ethics committee number: H-3-2012-116.Danish Data Protection Agency: 2007-58-0015/jr.n:30-0838.

Indexed as

EndoscopyResearch DesignAortaAortographyClinical ProtocolsCoronary Artery BypassDenmarkFemaleGraft Occlusion, VascularHand InjuriesHumansMaleMammary ArteriesMultidetector Computed TomographyPain MeasurementPostoperative Pain

Identifiers

PMID24754891
PMCPMC4033613
OpenAlexW2117740773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.