Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35419440›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Appropriate Timing of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

Qianlei Lang, Chaoyi Qin, Wei Meng

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qianlei LangDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Chaoyi QinDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Wei MengDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
West China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNSichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Currently, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are commonly used in the treatment of coronary atherosclerotic heart disease. But the optimal timing for CABG after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is still controversial. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the optimal timing for CABG in AMI. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases for documents that met the requirements. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) incidence and cerebrovascular accident incidence. Results: The search strategy produced 1,742 studies, of which 19 studies (including data from 113,984 participants) were included in our analysis. In total, 14 studies compared CABG within 24 h with CABG late 24 h after AMI and five studies compared CABG within 48 h with CABG late 48 h after AMI. The OR of in-hospital mortality between early 24 h CABG and late 24 h CABG group was 2.65 (95%CI: 1.96 to 3.58; Conclusion: The risk of early CABG could be higher in STEMI patients, and CABG should be delayed until 24 h later as far as possible. However, the timing of CABG does not affect mortality in NSTEMI patients. There was no statistical difference in perioperative MI and cerebrovascular accidents between early and late CABG.

Indexed as

coronary artery bypass graftearly surgerylate surgerymeta-analysismyocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID35419440
PMCPMC8995744
OpenAlexW4220677892

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.