ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2019
Early surgical myocardial revascularization in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- A Comprehensive Review of Acute Coronary Syndrome and Bypass Surgery: Recent Advances, Timing, and Indicative Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Revascularization strategies in Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: the clash continues.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Timing of coronary artery bypass grafting after myocardial infarction influences late survival.JTCVS open · 2024Article
- Re-evaluating the Role of CABG in Acute Coronary Syndromes.Current cardiology reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) there is no consensus regarding optimal time point for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Recent findings suggest that long-term outcomes are improved in early-revascularized NSTEMI patients. However, it has been stated that early surgery is associated to increased operative risk. In this study, we wanted to elucidate if early CABG in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome can be performed safely.
methodsWe performed a monocentric-prospective observational study within a 2-year interval. A total of 217 consecutive patients (41 female, age 68.9±10.2, ES II 6.62±8.56) developed NSTEMI and underwent CABG. Patients were divided into two groups according to the time point of coronary artery bypass after symptom onset (group A: <72 h; group B: >72 h). Endpoints included 6-month mortality and incidence of MACE (death, stroke or re-infarction).
resultsThere were no differences regarding mortality between both groups (30 days: group A 2.4%
conclusionsEarly revascularized patients showed a higher level of illness. However, results of early CABG were comparable to those following delayed revascularization. Moreover, EuroSCORE II was determined as independent risk factors for mortality.
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.