ArticleMedicine2020
In-hospital outcomes of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with and without prior coronary artery bypass graft: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention on saphenous vein grafts.ARYA atherosclerosis · 2024Article
- Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Impact of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on coronary collaterals in patients with a chronic total occlusion (CTO).The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2021Article
- Percutaneous coronary intervention of totally occluded coronary venous bypass grafts: An exercise in futility?World journal of cardiology · 2021Article
- Comparison of outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion in patients with and without prior bypass grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesReview
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical outcomes of chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in prior coronary artery bypass graft (pCABG) patients have been investigated; however, the results are inconsistent.The present meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes of CTO PCI in patients with and without prior CABG (nCABG). The endpoints included technical success, procedural success, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding, coronary perforation, pericardial tamponade, emergency CABG, and vascular access complication.A total of 7 studies comprising of 11099 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that compared to nCABG patents, pCABG patients were associated with lower technical success (82.3% versus 87.8%; OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.68; P < .00001; I = 0%) and procedural success (80.4% versus 86.2%; OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.53-0.70; P < .00001; I = 10%); a higher risk of all-cause mortality (OR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.56-5.57; P = 0.0008; I = 0%), MI (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.40-3.80; P = .001; I = 5%), and coronary perforation (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.51-3.08; P < 0.0001; I = 52%). On the other hand, the risk of pericardial tamponade (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.15-1.18; P = .10; I = 21%), major bleeding (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.90-2.53; P = .11; I = 0%), vascular access complication (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.93-2.41; P = .10; I = 0%), and emergency CABG (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.25-3.91; P = .99; I = 0%) was similar in both groups.Compared to nCABG patients, pCABG patients had lower CTO PCI success rates, higher rates of in-hospital mortality, MI, and coronary perforation, and similar risk of pericardial tamponade and vascular complication rates.
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.