SynthesisGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in General 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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparable survival over an extended follow-up after on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a propensity score-matched cohort.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Critical insights on "Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis".General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOff-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery (OPCAB) has been suggested as superior to on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery (ONCAB) in certain high-risk subgroups, but its benefit in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate OPCAB versus ONCAB outcomes in COPD patients.
methodsWe followed PRISMA guidelines and searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library in August 2024 for studies comparing OPCAB and ONCAB in COPD patients. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1 and Rstudio with a fixed or random effects model.
resultsSix studies with a total of 1,687 patients were included, of which 1,062 (62.95%) underwent OPCAB. The mean patient age was 63.6 years. OPCAB did not significantly affect all-cause mortality compared to ONCAB (OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.65-1.99). There were no significant differences in reintubation (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.53-1.23), prolonged ventilation (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.24-1.22), post-operative atrial fibrillation (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.70-1.15), or ARDS (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.14-1.33). However, ventilation time was significantly shorter in the OPCAB group (MD - 5.30 h; 95% CI - 7.22 to - 3.38).
conclusionOPCAB is associated with reduced ventilation time in COPD patients though it shows no significant difference in all-cause mortality or other post-operative complications compared to ONCAB.
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.