Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38994227›Full record

ArticleCardiology research2024

Comparative Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Recent Randomized Controlled Trials.

Jordan Llerena-Velastegui, Kristina Zumbana-Podaneva, Sebastian Velastegui-Zurita, Melany Mejia-Mora, Juan Perez-Tomassetti, Allison Cabrera-Cruz, Pablo Haro-Arteaga, Ana Clara Fonseca Souza de Jesus, Pedro Moraes Coelho, Cristian Sanahuja-Montiel

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiology research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

10 authors.

Jordan Llerena-VelasteguiPontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Medical School, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4246-0980
Kristina Zumbana-PodanevaPontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Medical School, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7445-9891
Sebastian Velastegui-ZuritaPontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Medical School, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1310-2802
Melany Mejia-MoraPontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, Medical School, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7875-5428
Juan Perez-TomassettiUniversity of the Americas, Medical School, Quito, Ecuador.
Allison Cabrera-CruzCatholic University of Santiago de Guayaquil, Medical School, Guayaquil, Ecuador.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7611-7750
Pablo Haro-ArteagaUniversity of La Rioja, Logrono, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8964-4651
Ana Clara Fonseca Souza de JesusFaculdade de Minas - FAMINAS-BH, Medical School, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8505-8444
Pedro Moraes CoelhoFaculdade de Minas - FAMINAS-BH, Medical School, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9372-8989
Cristian Sanahuja-MontielUniversity of Medical Sciences, Medical School, San Jose, Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9317-8056

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a major global health issue and a leading cause of death. This study compares the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the management of IHD, focusing on their impact on revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI), and post-procedural stroke. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of PCI and CABG in treating IHD based on an exhaustive literature review of the past 5 years, emphasizing recent advancements and outcomes in IHD management. Methods: A comprehensive literature review analyzed 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The study specifically assessed the incidences of revascularization, stroke, and MI in patients treated with either PCI or CABG. The comparison between CABG and PCI exclusively focused on lesions with a SYNTAX score exceeding 32. Results: Our findings highlight CABG's significant efficacy over PCI in reducing revascularization and MI. The aggregated Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) value for revascularization was 1.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.65 - 2.07), signifying CABG's advantage. Additionally, CABG demonstrated superior performance in diminishing MI occurrences (M-H = 2.71, 95% CI: 1.13 - 6.53). In contrast, PCI was more effective in reducing stroke (M-H = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.60 - 1.10). Conclusion: The study confirms CABG's superiority in reducing revascularization and MI in IHD patients, highlighting PCI's effectiveness in reducing stroke risk. These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies in IHD management and emphasize the need for ongoing research and evidence-based guidelines to aid in treatment selection for IHD patients.

Indexed as

Coronary artery bypass graft surgeryIschemic heart diseaseMeta-analysisPercutaneous coronary interventionRevascularization

Identifiers

PMID38994227
PMCPMC11236347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.