ArticleOpen heart2020
Long-term survival in patients who had CABG with or without prior coronary artery stenting.
Article in Open heart, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of frailty on outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of Buerger-Allen Exercises on Lower Extremity Perfusion in Diabetes Mellitus Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Saphenous Vein Harvesting: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Trial
- Prognostic impact of prior percutaneous coronary intervention on patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting - A meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Follow-Up and Outcome after Coronary Bypass Surgery Preceded by Coronary Stent Implantation.The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct a large-scale, single-centre retrospective cohort study to understand the impact of prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on long-term survival of patients who then undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).
methodsBetween 1999 and 2017, a total of 11 332 patients underwent CABG at a hospital in the UK. The patients were stratified into those who received PCI (n=1090) or no PCI (n=10 242) prior to CABG. A total of 1058 patients from each group were matched using propensity score matching. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to assess risk-adjusted survival in patients with prior PCI. Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) model was then used to assess the effect of prior PCI and other variables in patients undergoing CABG.
resultsThe immediate postoperative outcome showed no difference in number of grafts per patients, blood transfusion, hospital stay or 30 days mortality between the groups. There was no significant difference in 5 years (90.8% vs 87.9), 10-year (76.5% vs 74.6%) and 15-year (64.4% vs 64.7%) survival between the non-PCI versus PCI groups. The Cox proportional hazards model further supports the null hypothesis as the PCI variable was found to be non-significant (CoxPH=1.03, p=0.75, CI=0.87-1.22) implying there was no difference in hazard of death for CABG patients with or without previous PCI. However, the model did yield information on the covariates that do affect the hazard of death.
conclusionThere is no difference in 5-year, 10-year and 15-year survival between patients undergoing CABG with or without prior PCI. However, certain patient, preoperative and intraoperative risk factors were identified with high hazard of death which needs to be investigated further.
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.