Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28505298›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery2017

Early health outcome and 10-year survival in patients undergoing redo coronary surgery with or without cardiopulmonary bypass: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Vito D Bruno, Mustafa Zakkar, Filippo Rapetto, Asif Rathore, Roberto Marsico, Pierpaolo Chivasso, Raimondo Ascione

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Vito D BrunoSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Mustafa ZakkarSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Filippo RapettoSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Asif RathoreSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Roberto MarsicoSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Pierpaolo ChivassoSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Raimondo AscioneSchool of Clinical Sciences, Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the in-hospital health outcome and 10-year survival in patients undergoing redo coronary surgery with (redo-CABG) or without (redo-OPCAB) cardiopulmonary bypass.

methodsA total of 349 redo coronary surgery patients were identified from our registry. Of these, 143 redo-OPCAB patients (40.97%) were compared with 206 redo-CABG patients. To minimize the bias, we also conducted propensity score matching. In Matched Analysis A, 111 redo-OPCAB patients with any type of primary cardiac operation were compared with 111 redo-CABG cases. In Matched Analysis B, 84 redo-OPCAB patients with isolated coronary surgery as their primary operation were compared with 84 redo-CABG patients. We assessed for all 3 analyses a composite of in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury, stroke and severe low cardiac output requiring intra-aortic balloon pump. In addition, we assessed 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival.

resultsIn the unmatched analysis, redo-CABG was associated with higher usage of intra-aortic balloon pump (10 vs 3%, P = 0.01) and composite compared with redo-OPCAB (25 vs 16%, P = 0.06) and similar 10-year survival (67.2 vs 68.5%, log-rank test: P = 0.78). Matched Analysis A showed similar rates of composite (15 vs 21%, P = 0.25) and 10-year survival (65.1 vs 60.8%, log-rank test: P = 0.5). Matched Analysis B showed reduction of the composite (19 vs 8%, P = 0.04), less in-hospital mortality (5 vs 0%, P = 0.13), 4.5 times less need for intra-aortic balloon pump (2 vs 11%, P = 0.02) favouring redo-OPCAB and a similar 10-year survival (71.6 vs 71.7%, log-rank test: P = 0.61).

conclusionsRedo-OPCAB surgery is feasible, safe and effective with improved in-hospital outcome and similar 10-year survival compared to redo-CABG.

Indexed as

AgedCardiac Surgical ProceduresCoronary Artery Bypass, Off-PumpFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreReoperationRetrospective StudiesCardio-pulmonary bypassCoronary surgeryOff-pump techniqueReoperationSurvival

Identifiers

PMID28505298
PMCPMC5848803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.