Coronary stenting versus bypass surgery in elderly with multivessel disease: long-term mortality rate is still up for debate.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Observation of Curative Effect of Trimetazidine Combined with Metoprolol in Elderly Patients with Coronary Heart Disease Complicated with Heart Failure and the Effect of Myocardial Remodeling by Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine.BioMed research international · 2022
   Article
2. Reply to the letter of Braber et al.: 'Coronary stenting versus bypass surgery in elderly with multivessel disease: long-term mortality rate is still up for debate'.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2020
   Article

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.