ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2019
Radial Artery Versus Saphenous Vein Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: a Literature Review.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic Virtual Simulation with Real-Time Haptic Feedback for Robotic Internal Mammary Artery Harvesting.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Iatrogenic Dissection of the Left Internal Mammary Artery During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Jump Radial Artery Graft Bifurcation Disease: A Case Report.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2023Article
- A Review of Arterial Grafts Used for Microvascular Arterial Reconstruction.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2021Article
- Coronary Artery Bypass: Review of Surgical Techniques and Impact on Long-Term Revascularization Outcomes.Cardiology and therapy · 2021Review
- Comparative Analysis Following Implementation of Two Types of Y-Composite Multiarterial Revascularization Strategies at a Single Academic Institution.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Conduits' Biology Regulates the Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.JACC. Basic to translational science · 2021Review
- Upregulation of miR‑423 improves autologous vein graft restenosis via targeting ADAMTS‑7.International journal of molecular medicine · 2020Article
- The π-Circuit Technique in Coronary Surgery: Analysis of 1359 Consecutive Cases.Open journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewCoronary artery bypass grafting is a preferred strategy for complete coronary revascularization in patients who have multi-vessel coronary artery disease, left ventricular dysfunction, and/or diabetes. Both arterial (internal thoracic artery/radial artery) and venous grafts are utilized to bypass the obstruction in native vessels. Despite having radial arterial grafts as a preferred second conduit for bypass, venous grafts are more commonly used. RECENT
findingsWe review the existing literature and report the preferred conduit based on a recently published meta-analysis of 6 randomized controlled trials. The analysis concluded that radial artery grafts are associated with fewer adverse cardiac events and better graft patency at 5 years of follow-up. Although saphenous vein grafting is the most commonly used conduit in addition to ITA, current data suggests that total arterial bypass (using RA conduit in addition to ITA) may be the better strategy. Both the US and European consensus guidelines advocate for the use of arterial over SV grafting for most patients.
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.