ReviewHerz2016
Revascularization in complex multivessel coronary artery disease after FREEDOM. Is there an indication for PCI and drug-eluting stents?
Review in Herz, 2016. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten-year all-cause death after percutaneous or surgical revascularization in diabetic patients with complex coronary artery disease.European heart journal · 2021Trial
- Current status of percutaneous coronary interventions in diabetics with multivessel disease - is it time to challenge FREEDOM?AsiaIntervention · 2024Review
- Silent Myocardial Ischemia Revisited, Another Silent Killer, Emphasis on the Diagnostic Value of Stress Echocardiography with Focused Update and Review.Advanced biomedical research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus is a highly prevalent metabolic disorder frequently associated with the development of coronary atherosclerosis. Myocardial revascularization assumes a central role in the treatment of diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. Although coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is in principle the revascularization modality of choice in diabetic patients with complex, multivessel disease, percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) using new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) remain a valuable treatment option for properly selected diabetic patients. Defining the appropriate revascularization strategy is often a challenging task that requires tailored approaches, accounting for individual patient surgical risk, anatomical configurations, and the technical feasibility of each procedure in addition to careful judgment of the possible benefits and risks inherent to PCI and CABG. Evidence is building that advances in DES technology may mitigate at least in part some of the adverse vascular effects of diabetes; whether this may translate to PCI outcomes comparable with those achieved by CABG is under investigation in randomized trials currently underway. This review article summarizes the indications for myocardial revascularization across the spectrum of clinical presentations and critically discusses current evidence and future perspectives regarding the value of each revascularization mode (CABG vs. PCI) in patients with diabetes.
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.