ArticleThe Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2015
Early Outcomes of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting during the Initial Learning Period.
Article in The Korean journal of 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) method has been used in coronary artery bypass surgery in many countries. We started using the EVH method recently, and investigated the results during the early learning period.
methodsBetween March 2012 and June 2014, 75 patients (31 patients in the EVH method group, and 44 patients in the open method group) who underwent isolated first-time coronary artery bypass grafting using vein grafts were retrospectively analyzed with respect to the early outcomes including graft patency and risk factors for leg wound complications. For assessing the patency of vein graft, we performed coronary computed tomography angiography during the immediate postoperative period and 6 months later.
resultsMean harvesting time of endoscopic method was about 15 minutes. Patency rate during the immediate operative period and the 6-month patency rate were similar between the two groups (postoperative period: EVH 100% vs. open method 94.4%, p=0.493; at 6 months: EVH 93.3% vs. open method 90.9%, p=0.791). Leg wound complications occurred more frequently in the open method group (EVH 3.2% vs. open method 13.6%, p=0.127). According to the analysis, age was an independent risk factor for leg wound complications.
conclusionEVH is a feasible method even for beginners and can be performed satisfactorily during their learning period.
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.