ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
External Stenting for Saphenous Vein Grafts in Coronary Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A 3D-printed extravascular stent containing sirtuin-3 engineered human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells maintains venous graft patency.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- Saphenous Vein Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts: Why Invest in VEST?Current vascular pharmacology · 2025Article
- Saphenous vein graft and nitric oxide: strategies to prevent graft failure and enhance patency in coronary artery bypass grafting.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Phenotypic switching of vascular smooth muscle cells: a central mechanism in vein graft intimal hyperplasia.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- External Support of Autologous Internal Jugular Vein Grafts with FRAME Mesh in a Porcine Carotid Artery Model.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- The VEST External Support for Saphenous Vein Grafts in Coronary Surgery: A Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The external stenting of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been proven to reduce intimal hyperplasia (IH) in animal models, paving the way for human randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to be conducted. Herein, we performed a study-level meta-analysis to assess the impact of the Venous External SupporT (VEST) device, an external stent, on the outcomes of SVGs. A systematic search was conducted to identify all RCTs comparing VEST-stented to non-stented SVGs in patients undergoing CABG. The primary outcome was graft occlusion. The main secondary outcomes were repeat revascularization, SVG IH area, and intimal-medial thickness. Two RCTs totaling 407 patients were included. At a mean follow-up of 1.5 years, there was no difference in graft occlusion between groups (incidence rate ratio: 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80-1.53). The rate of repeat revascularization was also similar (odds ratio: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.27-1.64). The IH area (standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.45; 95% CI: -0.79 to -0.10) and intimal-medial thickness (SMD: -0.50; 95% CI: -0.90 to -0.10) were significantly reduced in the VEST group. Our findings show that significant reductions in the IH area and the intimal-medial thickness in VEST-stented SVGs do not currently translate into a lesser need for repeat revascularization or less graft occlusion events compared to non-stented SVGs at 1.5 years after CABG.
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.