ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2019
Long-term outcomes of multiple and single arterial off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- The Significance of Simple Inflammatory Markers in Off Pump Surgery-Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- The use of both internal thoracic arteries for coronary revascularization increases the estimate of post-operative lower limb ischemia in patients with peripheral artery disease.Journal of cardiothoracic 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the clinical outcomes between multiple arterial (MA) and single arterial (SA) off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) when applied to left main coronary disease or three-vessel disease.
methodsA total of 537 patients with left main coronary disease or three-vessel disease underwent MA OPCAB (n=114) or SA OPCAB (n=423) in our center from January 2006 to December 2008. The propensity score matching (PSM) was used to obtain the risk-adjusted outcome. Both the perioperative and long-term results were analyzed.
resultsThe median follow-up time was 117 months (interquartile range, 110 to 128 months). There was no statistical difference in postoperative mortality and the volume of drainage. The intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) of the MA group was shorter than that of the SA group {1 [1-2]
conclusionsMA OPCAB was as safe as SA OPCAB, providing better perioperative recovery and better long-term clinical outcomes in the treatment of left main coronary disease or three-vessel disease.
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.