ReviewIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2018
Mechanical support for high-risk coronary artery bypass grafting.
Review in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2018. 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.
- Mechanical Circulatory Support on Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Advanced Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: State of the Art.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Leveraging Innovation to Mitigate Risk During Heart Surgery.Texas Heart Institute journal · 2023Article
- Management of Impella device fracture during direct aortic explantation.Journal of surgical case reports · 2023Article
- Preventive ImpellaJournal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Inotropic and Mechanical Support of Critically Ill Patient after Cardiac Surgery.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2020Article
- Impact and Implications of Neurocognitive Dysfunction in the Management of Ischemic Heart Failure.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support devices are being used to an increasing extent. The use of these devices as an adjunct to cardiac surgery to support ventricular function has contributed to improved outcomes for the highest risk patients. In the context of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, there are several potential indications for mechanical circulatory support: preoperatively in the setting of acute cardiogenic shock, or in patients with intractable angina with or without haemodynamic compromise; at induction of anaesthesia prophylactically in patients with critical coronary anatomy and/or severely impaired left ventricular function; intraoperatively in the setting of failure to wean from cardiopulmonary bypass; or postoperatively in patients who develop an intractable low cardiac output state. The use of the intra-aortic balloon pump, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, TandemHeart, Impella and central ventricular assist devices will be considered in the setting of high-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.
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.