ArticleJournal of cardiac surgery2020
Revascularization following non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in multivessel coronary disease.
Article in Journal of cardiac surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of perioperative dexmedetomidine on long-term outcomes in older patients following cardiac surgery: follow-up of a randomized trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- A Comprehensive Review of Acute Coronary Syndrome and Bypass Surgery: Recent Advances, Timing, and Indicative Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Percutaneous coronary interventionEuropean journal of translational myology · 2025Article
- Revascularization strategies in Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: the clash continues.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- An observational study of therapeutic procedures and in-hospital outcomes among patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction in Spain, 2016-2022: the role of diabetes mellitus.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2024Observational
- Staged versus concomitant transcatheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous coronary intervention: A national analysis.JTCVS open · 2022Article
- 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal revascularization approach for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) is controversial. We sought to investigate outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
methodsAdult patients with MVCAD and NSTEMI undergoing either CABG or PCI at a single institution between 2011 and 2018 were included. Multivariable analysis was utilized to determine independent predictors of death, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and readmissions. A subanalysis examined patients undergoing complete revascularization.
resultsA total of 2001 patients were included, of whom 1480 (74.0%) underwent CABG. CABG was associated with a lower risk-adjusted hazard for death (hazard ratio, 0.59, P < .001) and with improved survival at 1 year (92.0 vs 81.8%, P < .001) and 5 years (80.7 vs 63.3%, P < .001). Additionally, freedom from MACCE (P < .001) was greater in the CABG group and cumulative readmission, rates of MI, and rates of repeat revascularization were lower with CABG (each P < .001). Among patients undergoing complete revascularization, overall survival (1 year: 92.7 vs 83.9%, P = .010; 5 years: 81.1 vs 69.4%, P < .001) and freedom from MACCE (1 year: 92.3 vs 75.2%, P < .001; 5 years: 81.7 vs 61.4%, P < .001) remained higher for the CABG group; cumulative incidence of readmission was also decreased in those undergoing CABG (P < .001).
conclusionsIn this real-world analysis of patients with MVCAD presenting with NSTEMI, revascularization with CABG resulted in improved survival with lower rates of MACCE and readmission as compared to PCI, which persisted when accounting for complete revascularization.
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.