Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33781160›Full record

SynthesisRenal failure2021

Survival outcomes and adverse events in patients with chronic kidney disease after coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matching studies.

Ye-Gui Yang, Nuo Li, Meng-Hua Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Renal failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ye-Gui YangDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China.
Nuo LiGuangxi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2831-4904
Meng-Hua ChenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6972-9543
Guangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present meta-analysis of propensity score-matching studies aimed to compare the long-term survival outcomes and adverse events associated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

methodsElectronic databases were searched for studies comparing CABG and PCI in patients with CKD. The search period extended to 13 February 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction, revascularization, and stroke. Odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express the pooled effect. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.

resultsThirteen studies involving 18,005 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Long-term mortality risk was significantly lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70-0.83,

conclusionsOur propensity score matching analysis revealed that, based on long-term follow-up outcomes, CABG remains superior to PCI in patients with CKD.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery BypassHumansIncidenceMyocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPropensity ScoreRenal DialysisRenal Insufficiency, ChronicStrokeChronic kidney diseasecoronary artery bypass surgerypercutaneous coronary interventionpropensity score matching

Identifiers

PMID33781160
PMCPMC8018500
OpenAlexW3143317772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.