Trial reportThe Canadian journal of cardiology2014
Appropriate revascularization in stable angina: lessons from the BARI 2D trial.
Trial report in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2014. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a risk score to identify patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease who can defer bypass surgery.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2019Article
- Survival outcomes post percutaneous coronary intervention: Why the hype about stent type? Lessons from a healthcare system in India.PloS one · 2018Observational
- Finding the Gatekeeper to the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: Coronary CT Angiography or Stress Testing?Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 2012 Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease recommend intensive antianginal and risk factor treatment (optimal medical management [OMT]) before considering revascularization to relieve symptoms. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial randomized patients with ischemic heart disease and anatomy suitable to revascularization to (1) initial OMT with revascularization if needed or (2) initial revascularization plus OMT and found no difference in major cardiovascular events. Ultimately, however, 37.9% of the OMT group was revascularized during the 5-year follow-up period.
methodsData from the 1192 patients randomized to OMT were analyzed to identify subgroups in which the incidence of revascularization was so high that direct revascularization without a trial period could be justified. Multivariate logistic analysis, Cox regression models of baseline data, and a landmark analysis of participants who did not undergo revascularization at 6 months were constructed.
resultsThe models that used only data available at the time of study entry had limited predictive value for revascularization by 6 months or by 5 years; however, the model incorporating severity of angina during the first 6 months could better predict revascularization (C statistic = 0.789).
conclusionsWith the possible exception of patients with severe angina and proximal left anterior descending artery disease, this analysis supports the recommendation of the 2012 guidelines for a trial of OMT before revascularization. Patients could not be identified at the time of catheterization, but a short period of close follow-up during OMT identified the nearly 40% of patients who underwent revascularization.
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.