Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30739215›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2019

Coronary Revascularization in High-Risk Stable Patients With Significant Comorbidities: Challenges in Decision-Making.

Joshua Schulman-Marcus, Kellsey Peterson, Riju Banerjee, Sanjay Samy, Neil Yager

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Complex Coronary Interventions: Are We Reaching a Plateau?Journal of personalized medicine · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Joshua Schulman-MarcusDivision of Cardiology, Albany Medical Center, 47 New Scotland Ave, Albany, NY, 12208, USA. schulmj1@amc.edu.
Kellsey PetersonDivision of Medicine, Albany Medical Center, Albany, USA.
Riju BanerjeeDivision of Cardiology, Albany Medical Center, 47 New Scotland Ave, Albany, NY, 12208, USA.
Sanjay SamyDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, USA.
Neil YagerDivision of Cardiology, Albany Medical Center, 47 New Scotland Ave, Albany, NY, 12208, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThere is a growing cohort of complex high-risk patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) who present for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). These patients are older, have complex coronary disease, and a substantial comorbidity burden including frailty. The procedural risks and outcomes of CABG and PCI in these patients are more difficult to assess based on the available literature, which has generally studied a younger population with a lower comorbidity burden. RECENT

findingsThere have been initiatives to recalibrate and expand risk models derived from procedural registries to inform the care of complex higher-risk patients, including patients "turned down" for CABG. There is greater recognition of the need for improved assessment of risk, quality, and benefits of coronary revascularization in higher-risk SIHD patients with a substantial comorbidity burden. Clinicians and patients should be aware that there are significant evidence gaps regarding revascularization in complex high-risk patients. The limitations of procedural-derived risk scores should be understood when presenting treatment options. Future randomized controlled trials and expanded registries are greatly desired and should be achievable. Meanwhile, a multidisciplinary heart team approach should be employed for proper decision-making.

Indexed as

CABGCoronary revascularizationPCIRisk estimation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.