ReviewAnnals of cardiac anaesthesia
Myocardial revascularization without extracorporeal circulation; Why hasn't it convinced yet?
Review in Annals of cardiac anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for octogenarians: A meta-analysis involving 146 372 patients.Clinical cardiology · 2022Pooled it
- Effect of Age on Clinical Outcomes Following On-/Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass: Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Quality of life and functional capacity in patients after cardiac surgery intensive care unit.World journal of cardiology · 2024Review
- The Significance of Simple Inflammatory Markers in Off Pump Surgery-Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Association of an organ transplant-based approach with a dramatic reduction in postoperative complications following radical nephrectomy and tumor thrombectomy in renal cell carcinoma.European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2019Article
- Is there a long-term survival benefit with on pump coronary artery bypass grafting?Annals of translational medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracorporeal circulation has led to a great development in cardiovascular surgery during the last five decades. Its time-proven efficacy and safety have made on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) the gold standard method of surgical revascularization. However, coronary revascularization on cardiopulmonary bypass and the accompanying aortic manipulation are related to plenty of deleterious complications. Therefore, off-pump CABG surgery was established to avoid complications. Nevertheless, despite the initial enthusiasm on this technique, only 20% of myocardial revascularization procedures worldwide are performed off-pump. Not only are off-pump cardiac procedures more technically difficult but also they do not provide better results in terms of graft patency, completeness of revascularization, repeat revascularization requirement, cost, and quality of life. Completeness of revascularization and anastomotic quality should not be compromised to avoid cardiopulmonary bypass.
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.