ReviewJournal of cardiac surgery2021
International study on impact of COVID-19 on cardiac and thoracic aortic aneurysm surgery.
Review in Journal of cardiac surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic literature review on biopsychosocial factors in the surgical waiting list.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Review
- Optimising cardiac surgery outcomes in people with diabetes: the OCTOPuS pilot feasibility study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Article
- Providing safe perioperative care in cardiac surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.Best practice & research. Clinical anaesthesiology · 2021Review
- Dissecting the Management and Outcomes of Thoracic Aortovascular Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Annals of vascular surgery · 2021Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on aortic operations.Seminars in vascular surgery · 2021Review
- International study on impact of COVID-19 on cardiac and thoracic aortic aneurysm surgery.Journal of cardiac surgery · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic gripped every nation's health care system and provisions on all levels. In cardiac and aortic surgery, as it is with most specialities, elective surgeries were halted. AIMS OF THE STUDY: We captured reflections, contingencies, and current practices across of high-volume centers in cardiac and aortic surgery globally. We also aimed this study to assess decision on prioritization of the surgical patients, the need for personal protection equipment, and the choice of preoperative investigations in current dynamic and fluid climate.
methodsA validated web-based questionnaire was constructed and was circulated to the international surgeons amongst high volume cardiac and aortic surgery centers. Their intrinsic feedback on decision making, the impact of the lockdown, and perspectives for the future ahead of us all were noted. A mixed-method approach was constructed. Qualitative data analysis was introduced to signify the impact globally.
resultsOverall, 23 centers from 18 countries participated in this international study. About 91.7% of the respondents stopped operating on elective patients during the pandemic. The majority of the surgeons agreed that acute aortic dissection (87.1%) should be operated as an emergency procedure and stable triple vessel disease (87.1%) to be considered as an elective procedure. Three-fifth (60%) of the respondents relied on computerized tomography chest as a preoperative screening modality.
conclusionIn the present climate where there is a paucity of evidence, this will give an interim consensus for the cardiac surgeons. With the increase in the cumulative number of patients with COVID-19, careful utilization of the resources regarding hospital beds and manpower is of paramount importance.
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.