ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2024
A review of nomenclature in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting-the anarchy of terminology.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic 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.
- New Clinical Advances in Minimally Invasive Coronary Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSince the development of minimally invasive coronary surgery, nomenclature has rapidly grown to distinguish each unique method. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the different terms used for minimally invasive coronary bypass grafting through the years.
methodsA literature search was performed in August 2024 using the PubMed electronic database. To extract the best search results: "minimally invasive" and "coronary artery bypass grafting" were used as either keywords or MeSH terms. The term robotic was specifically included for a second search. Eligible articles for this review were articles using an abbreviation to describe minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting.
resultsA total of 2118 publications on non-robotic minimally invasive coronary procedures and 392 on robotic-assisted techniques were reviewed, describing 40 unique terms for the procedure. Procedures were grouped based on left internal mammary artery harvest and anastomosis methods: mini-thoracotomy for both harvesting and coronary anastomosis (n = 586), endoscopic harvest with mini-thoracotomy (n = 37), robotic harvest with mini-thoracotomy (n = 144) and closed-chest revascularization (n = 140). Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting was the most studied technique (486 publications, non-robotic and robotic), followed by closed-chest totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (n = 124).
conclusionsIn conclusion, a wide variety of terms are used within the field of minimally invasive coronary surgery. A total of 40 different terms have been published, each describing certain specifics of the procedure. For anyone involved in the field of minimally invasive surgery, it is important to understand the differences and similarities of these procedures.
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.