The "No-touch" Harvesting Technique Revives the Position of the Saphenous Vein as an Important Conduit in CABG Surgery: 30-year Anniversary.

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.

1. For patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and recurrent myocardial ischemia, percutaneous coronary intervention on bypass graft or native coronary artery?-A 5-year follow-up cohort study.Clinical cardiology · 2023
   Observational
2. Quality of Life After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in No-Touch Saphenous Vein Grafts is Significantly Better Than in Conventional Vein Grafts.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2022
   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.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as