ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Coronary artery bypass grafting
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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.
- Retraction: Coronary artery bypass graftingJournal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and drug-eluting stent implantation (DES) are established as central methods of revascularization for patients with coronary artery disease. This study aims to analyse the health trajectories of patients after first CABG or first, second or third DES within the first three years, with a focus on follow-up interventions, severe care need, transition into a nursing home, and death. Methods: Based on health claims data (n=11,581), we estimated age-and sex standardized probabilities of reintervention, and of transition to severe care need, nursing home and death following initial CABG (n=2,008) or DES (n=9,573) for patients aged 50 years and older using logistic regression models and direct standardization. Up to three follow-up DES interventions and one follow-up CABG were considered. Results: There was a fairly high probability of reintervention, particularly after a DES and within the first year. Follow-up interventions were more likely to involve DES than CABG. The probability of death was notably higher for CABG patients. The probabilities of severe care need and moving to a nursing home were slightly lower and similar across the revascularization methods and over time. Conclusions: DES and CABG are often associated with a need for follow-up interventions. Depending on the procedure, however, the risk of repeat surgery or adverse health outcomes varies. DES is associated with a relatively high probability of follow-up revascularization and a nearly constant probability of negative health outcomes in the short and medium term. In contrast, within three years after a CABG, follow-up reinterventions are rather rare. However, this procedure is particularly associated with an increased risk of mortality and short-term transition into a nursing home.
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.