ArticleIndian heart journal
Long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft - A retrospective experience.
Article in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients who had previously undergone coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
methodA total of 219 patients who had a history of CABG and underwent PCI at tertiary care centre were retrospectively enrolled in this study. Clinical endpoints such as major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization), any death, cardiac death, MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and target lesion revascularisation (TLR) were reported at long-term follow-up.
resultsAbout 66.6 % patients were treated on the native vessel, and 24.2 % on grafts vessel. In all, 360 stents [83.3 % drug-eluting stent (DES) and 16.6 % bare metal stent (BMS)] were implanted. Diabetes mellitus (p = 0.03), LVEF<55 % for PCI (p = 0.04), stent type [BMS (p < 0.001) and DES (p < 0.001)] and chronic kidney disease [(CKD) p < 0.01] were appeared to be the significant predictors of mortality. Age at CABG>50 years (p = 0.04), stent type [BMS (p = 0.03) and DES (p < 0.01)] and CKD (p < 0.01) as independent predictors for MACE. Higher event rate was reported in graft-vessel PCI group as compared to native-vessel PCI group: ISR (p < 0.01), TLR (p = 0.01), mortality (p = 0.04), MACE (p < 0.01) and MI (p = 0.05). Mortality (p < 0.001), MACE (p < 0.001) and MI (p < 0.001) were significantly lower in DES vs. BMS groups.
conclusionNative-vessel PCI was associated with better clinical outcomes than graft-vessel PCI that also with the use of DES as the first choice in patients with a history of 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.