ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Disparities in 180-day infection rates following coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement.
Article in The 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. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe study objective was to compare sex and racial differences in 180-day infection rates after coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement.
methodsA statewide Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database was linked to Medicare claims data to identify 8887 beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement (surgical or transcatheter) between 2017 and 2021. The primary outcome was the incidence of 180-day infection. Secondary outcomes included 10 infection subtypes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between sex and race (Black vs non-Black) and infections. Two secondary analyses were conducted: (1) robustness of the primary analysis after excluding urinary tract infections given established sex-related differences and (2) testing a sex∗race interaction.
resultsThe mean (SD) age of the cohort was 74.5 (8.9) years, with 36.9% female and 4.2% Black. The infection rate was 19.6%, although this varied by patient sex (female vs male: 23.7% vs 17.1%) and race (Black vs non-Black: 28.0% vs 19.2%), both P less than .0001. Differences in infection rates for female patients were driven by urinary tract infections and pneumonia for Black patients. Risk-adjusted odds of infection were 1.6-fold significantly higher among female patients but nonsignificant for Black patients. A sex∗race interaction was present, with non-Black female patients versus non-Black male patients having a 1.63 higher odds of infection.
conclusionsThis multicenter study identified a 1.6-fold higher odds of infection among female patients. Non-Black female versus male patients had a 63% higher odds of infection. Transdisciplinary collaborative learning interventions should be considered to address these known disparities in infection rates.
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.