ReviewGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2015
Intraoperative graft assessment during coronary artery bypass surgery.
Review in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Left atrial appendage closure with clip in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Assessment of the Graft Quality and Patency during and after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Correlation between Preoperative Coronary Artery Stenosis Severity Measured by Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Intraoperative Transit Time Flow Measurement of Attached Grafts.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is an established revascularization method for treating multivessel coronary artery disease. The goal of CABG is to achieve complete revascularization with a durable, patent graft without reintervention. However, early graft failure, including that associated with technical errors, has been reported. This makes intraoperative verification of graft patency one of the most important ways in which surgeons can reduce the rate of early graft failure. Conventional angiography is considered the gold standard for graft assessment. However, because it is invasive and inconvenient, several alternatives to intraoperative graft assessment have become available that help reduce early graft failure by allowing revision of the anastomosis intraoperatively. The aim of this article is to review the advantages and disadvantages of several intraoperative graft assessment methods for CABG.
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.