SynthesisScientific reports2022
A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of liver dysfunction with outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Pooled it
- An updated meta-analysis of optimal medical therapy with or without invasive therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing CABG and PCI across the globe based on current regional registry evidence.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Coronary artery bypass without extracorporeal circulation pump in acute coronary syndromes: a single-center observational study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Observational
- Cardiovascular comorbidities in hospitalized patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and factors associated with a higher case-fatality rate.Future cardiology · 2025Article
- Percutaneous coronary interventionEuropean journal of translational myology · 2025Article
- Impact of Revascularization on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients Without ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the Arabian Gulf.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Percutaneous vs. surgical revascularization of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: the SWEDEHEART registry.European heart journal · 2025Article
- Revascularization strategies in Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: the clash continues.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Invasive Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: From Anatomical Features to Mechanistic Differences.Current cardiology reviews · 2024Review
- Evolving Management Paradigm for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Patients: JACC Review Topic of the Week.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2023Review
- Chest Pain at Rest With Unremarkable ECG and Cardiac Enzymes: Case Study Emphasising the Importance of Clinical Suspicion in the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease.In vivo (Athens, Greece)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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) affects millions of patients. Although an invasive strategy can improve survival, the optimal treatment [i.e., percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)] is not clear. We performed a meta-analysis of studies reporting outcomes between PCI and CABG in patients with NSTE-ACS. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were assessed. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. Inverse variance method and random model were performed. We identified 13 observational studies (48,891 patients). No significant difference was found in the primary endpoint [CABG vs. PCI, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70; 1.23]. CABG was associated with lower long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (IRR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54; 0.76) and lower long-term re-revascularization (IRR 0.37, 95% CI 0.30; 0.47). There was no significant difference in long-term myocardial infarction (CABG vs. PCI, IRR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50; 1.84) and peri-operative mortality (CABG vs. PCI, odds ratio 1.36, 95% CI 0.94; 1.95). For the treatment of NSTE-ACS, CABG and PCI are associated with similar rates of long-term mortality and myocardial infarction. CABG is associated with lower rates of long-term MACE and re-revascularization. Randomized comparisons in this setting are necessary.
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.