ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2025
Do patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy benefit from off-pump coronary bypass surgery? (From the KROK registry).
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes and long-term mortality between off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy who had a left ventricle ejection fraction of ≤35%.
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using data from the Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures database, encompassing patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting in Poland between 2012 and 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: on-pump and off-pump. Propensity score matching was used to balance the groups. The primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality following surgical revascularization.
resultsA total of 9920 patients were included, with 3116 patients in each group after propensity score matching. The median follow-up period was 4 years. The off-pump group was associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate (6.4% vs 9.1%, P = 0.002) and fewer perioperative complications. However, long-term survival analysis revealed a modest but statistically significant advantage for on-pump group at the 10-year follow-up (P = 0.047).
conclusionsOff-pump provides short-term benefits, including reduced early mortality and fewer complications compared to on-pump technique. However, these advantages do not translate into improved long-term survival, where on-pump demonstrates a slight benefit. The choice between off-pump and on-pump technique should be individualized based on patient-specific factors and surgical expertise.
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.