ArticleHeart and vessels2018
Double versus single source left-sided coronary revascularization using bilateral internal thoracic artery graft alone.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2018. 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.
- Outcomes and Patency of Complex Configurations of Composite Grafts Using Bilateral Internal Thoracic Arteries.The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left-sided coronary revascularization with bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) graft is performed usually either with an in situ (double source) or Y-graft configuration (single source). Two hundred fifty-three (mean age, 67.1 ± 9.5 years) patients underwent isolated left-sided coronary revascularization with BITA graft alone at the present authors' institution (2000-2015). Skeletonized BITA grafts were used either in an in situ (n = 199) or Y-graft configuration (n = 54). Forty pairs were identified with the propensity score-matching. Outcomes of the two groups were compared both in unmatched and matched series. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing was performed in five pairs of selected, asymptomatic matched patients having patent BITA grafts at coronary computed tomography angiography. BITA in situ patients had lower risk profiles than BITA Y-graft patients (median EuroSCORE II, 1.9 vs. 2.9%, p = 0.051). In-hospital mortality (5.6 vs. 0, p = 0.0093) and the rates of postoperative complications except deep sternal wound infection were higher in BITA Y-graft patients. However, these differences were not confirmed in matched groups. During the follow-up period (mean, 5.9 ± 4.3 years), between BITA in situ and BITA Y-graft matched patients, there were no differences in non-parametric estimates of freedom from cardiac death (p = 0.6), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs, p = 0.65), and repeat coronary revascularization (p = 0.44). Adjusted risk estimates of MACCEs according to BITA configuration confirmed no superiority of the one configuration over the other (p ≥ 0.44). No significant differences were found at the cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Results of left-sided coronary revascularization with BITA graft alone are independent from BITA configuration, even after stress testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28801799What 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.