ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2020
Preserving the endothelium in saphenous vein graft with both conventional and no-touch preparation.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of Three Different Surgical Techniques on Microscopic Damage of Saphenous Vein Grafts-A Randomized Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Trial
- Impact of Age on Endothelial Function of Saphenous Vein Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of the no-touch harvesting technique on the vessel diameter of saphenous vein grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting.JTCVS techniques · 2022Article
- Perivascular Adipose Tissue Is a Major Source of Nitric Oxide in Saphenous Vein Grafts Harvested via the No-Touch Technique.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- What is the impact of preserving the endothelium on saphenous vein graft performance? Comments on the 'NO' touch harvesting technique.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the inferior patency compared to arterial grafts, a saphenous vein graft (SVG) is widely used for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). A lower atherosclerosis rate and higher patency have been reported for SVG obtained via the no-touch technique (NT) than via conventional preparation (CV). Although CV-mediated endothelial dysfunction is implied, the precise mechanism underlying the higher patency with NT is poorly understood.
methodsHuman residual SVGs during CABG and SVG sections after autopsy were analyzed. The endothelial surface was observed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and blindly compared between CV and NT. The endothelial integrity was also analyzed with immunohistochemistry.
resultsUnexpectedly, the hyperfine structure on SEM was comparable between CV and NT before grafting, and microvillus, a characteristic of endothelium, was indistinguishable between them. Von Willebrand Factor, an endothelial marker, was equally detected throughout the vascular wall in both groups from residual and postmortem sections.
conclusionsThe morphological integrity of the endothelium was successfully preserved in SVG with CV, even at an ultrastructural level. Although its functionality remains to be addressed, other factors than the endothelium may be involved in the high patency obtained by NT. The present findings suggest that the characteristics of NT and surgical methodology should be reconsidered.
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.