ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Aprotinin in high-risk isolated coronary artery bypass graft patients: a 3-year propensity matched study.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Targeting hemostatic enzymes: from mechanistic insights to therapeutic frontiers.Current opinion in hematology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAprotinin, a serine protease inhibitor, has been used variably in cardiac surgery amidst ongoing debates about its safety following several previous studies. This study assesses the outcomes of aprotinin in high-risk isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (iCABG) patients.
methodsThe study retrospectively analysed a cohort of 1026 iCABG patients, including 51 patients who underwent aprotinin treatment. Logistic regression powered score matching was employed to compare aprotinin patients with a control group, in a propensity-matched cohort of 96 patients. The primary outcome measured was in-hospital death, with secondary outcomes including renal dysfunction, stroke, myocardial infarction, re-exploration for bleeding or tamponade, and postoperative stay durations.
resultsThe aprotinin cohort had high-risk preoperative patients with significantly higher EUROSCORE II values, 7.5 (± 4.2), compared to 3.9 (± 2.5) in control group. However, aprotinin group showed no statistically significant increase (p-value: 0.44) in hospital mortality with OR 2.5 [95% CI 0.51, 12.3]. Major secondary outcome rates of renal replacement therapy and postoperative stroke compared to the control group were also statistically insignificant between the two groups.
conclusionThis study suggests that aprotinin may be safely used in a select group of high-risk iCABG patients. The reintroduction of aprotinin under specific conditions reflects its potential benefits in managing bleeding in high-risk surgeries, but also underscores the complexity of its risk-benefit profile in such critical care settings. Nonetheless, it highlights the importance of carefully selecting patients and conducting additional research, including larger and more controlled studies to fully comprehend the potential risks and benefits of aprotinin.
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.