Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34453576›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2022

Coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and left main disease: insights from a register throughout Germany.

Peter Stachon, Klaus Kaier, Philip Hehn, Alexander Peikert, Dennis Wolf, Vera Oettinger, Dawid Staudacher, Daniel Duerschmied, Andreas Zirlik, Manfred Zehender and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2022. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Catheter based left atrial appendage closure in-hospital outcomes in Germany from 2016 to 2020.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2024
    Article
  4. [Clinical outcomes of percutaneous intervention on the unprotected left main coronary artery].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024
    Observational
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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter StachonDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. Peter.stachon@universitaets-herzzentrum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3796-1476
Klaus KaierCenter of Big Data Analysis in Cardiology (CeBAC), Department of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Philip HehnCenter of Big Data Analysis in Cardiology (CeBAC), Department of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Alexander PeikertDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Dennis WolfDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Vera OettingerDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Dawid StaudacherDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Daniel DuerschmiedDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Andreas ZirlikDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria.
Manfred ZehenderDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christoph BodeDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Constantin von Zur MühlenDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology I, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DEGraz University Hospital · AT

Funding

Deutsche Stiftung für Herzforschung F05/20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent randomized controlled trials have sparked debate about the optimal treatment of patients suffering from left main coronary artery disease. The present study analyzes outcomes of left main stenting versus coronary bypass grafting (CABG) in a nationwide registry in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS).

methodsAll cases suffering from CCS and left main coronary artery disease treated either with CABG or stent, were identified within the database of the German bureau of statistics. Logistic or linear regression models were used with 20 baseline patient characteristics as potential confounders to compare both regimens.

resultsIn 2018, 1318 cases with left main stenosis were treated with CABG and 8,920 with stent. Patients assigned for stenting were older (72.58 ± 9.87 vs. 68.63 ± 9.40, p < 0.001) and at higher operative risk, as assessed by logistic EuroSCORE (8.77 ± 8.45 vs. 4.85 ± 4.65, p < 0.001). After risk adjustment, no marked differences in outcomes were found for in-hospital mortality and stroke (risk adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for stent instead of CABG: aOR mortality: 1.08 [95% CI 0.66; 1.78], p = 0.748; aOR stroke: 0.59 [0.27; 1.32], p = 0.199). Stent implantation was associated with a reduced risk of relevant bleeding (aOR 0.38 [0.24; 0.61], p < 0.001), reduced prolonged ventilation time (aOR 0.54 [0.37 0.79], p = 0.002), and postoperative delirium (aOR 0.16 [0.11; 0.22], p < 0.001). Furthermore, stent implantation was associated with shorter hospital stay (- 6.78 days [- 5.86; - 7.71], p < 0.001) and lower costs (- €10,035 [- €11,500; - €8570], p < 0.001).

conclusionLeft main stenting is a safe and effective treatment option for CCS-patients suffering from left main coronary artery disease at reasonable economic cost. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and left main disease: insights from a register throughout Germany. All cases with chronic coronary syndrome and left main stenosis treated in 2018 in Germany either with left main stenting or coronary bypass grafting were extracted from a nation-wide database. In-hospital outcomes were compared after logistic regression analysis.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseDrug-Eluting StentsPercutaneous Coronary InterventionStrokeConstriction, PathologicCoronary Artery BypassGermanyHumansStentsTreatment OutcomeCoronary artery bypass graftingLeft main coronary artery diseasemortalityStent

Identifiers

PMID34453576
PMCPMC8397600
OpenAlexW3194893903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.