ArticleIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Comparison of conventional and modified carbo-dissection techniques for LIMA harvesting in CABG.
Article in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06155045 (A Comparative Study Between Conventional & Modified Carbo-dissection Techniques for LIMA Harvesting in CABG Patients), which is not on this 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.
A Comparative Study Between Conventional & Modified Carbo-dissection Techniques for LIMA Harvesting in CABG Patients
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the use of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) is considered the gold standard. The conventional technique of using electrocautery for LIMA harvesting is associated with adverse events. In this study, we used a different technique that combined carbon dioxide with electrocautery to harvest LIMA and compared it with the conventional electrocautery method. Forty-six patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomized into two groups (23 in each): conventional and carbo-dissection for prospective comparison. The data collected from the 46 subjects (23 in each group) were organized, tabulated, and interpreted on the basis of the objectives of the study using descriptive and inferential statistics via Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) package 19.0. The objective of this study was to compare conventional and carbo-dissection methods in terms of operative time and flow rate. The mean operative time in the carbo-dissection group was 15.48 ± 2.538 min and that in the conventional group was 15.78 ± 2.194 min. There was no statistically significant difference in the operative time between the two groups. The mean flow per minute in the carbo-dissection group was higher (58.61 ± 29.617 mL) than that in the conventional group (53.35 ± 25.669 mL), although it was not statistically significant. There was no significant statistical difference between the conventional and modified carbo-dissection techniques for harvesting LIMA in terms of flow rate per minute and operative time. On the basis of this, we can conclude that the modified carbo-dissection technique has similar outcomes to the conventional method of LIMA harvesting. The Trial Registry No. (clinicaltrials.gov) is NCT06155045.
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.