ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2017
Early clinical outcomes of on-pump beating-heart versus off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction: the experience of a single center.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in Nuclear Cardiac Imaging: Novel Advances, Emerging Techniques, and Recent Clinical Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Clinical implication of coronary artery bypass graft with surgical ventricular reconstruction in patients with left ventricular dysfunction in the current clinical practice.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Article
- Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery outcomes in patients with severe left ventricle dysfunction: inverse probability weighted study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- In-hospital mortality of patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting in Iranian population.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Article
- On-pump beating heart versus off-pump myocardial revascularization-a propensity-matched comparison.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2021Article
- Simultaneous endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm and coronary artery bypass grafting in an octogenarian: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2020Article
- Impacts of incomplete revascularization following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on clinical outcomes of patients with triple-vessel lesions: insights from a single-center study of propensity-matched data.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Early and Medium Outcomes of On-Pump Beating-Heart versus Off-Pump CABG in Patients with Moderate Left Ventricular Dysfunction.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgeryObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimited experiences of applying an on-pump beating-heart technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction have been reported. Which strategy, either off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, is the best strategy for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction is still controversial. This single-center study aimed to evaluate the impacts of an on-pump beating-heart versus an off-pump technique for surgical revascularization on the early clinical outcomes in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35% or less to explore which technique would be more suitable for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.
methodsA total of 216 consecutive patients with an echocardiographic estimated LVEF of 35% or less who underwent non-emergency, primary, isolated CABG from January 2010 to December 2014 were included in this study and were divided into either an ONBEAT group (patients who received on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, n = 88) or an OFF group (patients who received off-pump CABG surgery, n = 128). The early clinical outcomes were investigated and compared.
resultsPatients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group had a significant higher early postoperative LVEF (35.6 ± 2.9 vs. 34.8 ± 3.3%, p = 0.034) but shared a similar baseline LVEF (31.0 ± 2.8 vs. 31.0 ± 2.9%, p = 0.930). Patients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group received a greater number of grafts and an increased amount of drainage during the first 24 h (3.7 ± 0.8 vs. 2.8 ± 0.6, p <0.001; 715 ± 187 ml vs. 520 ± 148 ml, p <0.001, respectively), without evidence of worse in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity. Additionally, logistic regression analysis showed that surgical technique (on-pump beating-heart CABG vs. off-pump CABG) had no independent influence on in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity in patients with preoperative LVEF of 35% or less.
conclusionsThe on-pump beating-heart technique may be an acceptable alternative to the off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with an estimated LVEF of 35% or less.
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.