ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Hybrid Coronary Revascularisation: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Conventional hybrid coronary vs. robot-assisted minimally invasive direct revascularization: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Narrative Review of Techniques, Evidence, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evolution of coronary artery bypass grafting: conventional, minimally invasive, robotic, and hybrid revascularisation techniques.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Reply to Fatih Kizilyel and Bedirhan Bugra Bayici.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Innovations in Diagnosis and Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- [The heart team for coronary artery disease: perspectives from centers with heart surgery on site].Herz · 2025Article
- Current trends in hybrid coronary revascularization.Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2025Review
- Early outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease with low ejection fraction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
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
Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR) integrates coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to combine the benefits of minimally invasive surgery and advanced stent technology. Typically, HCR involves off-pump left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to left anterior descending artery (LAD) bypass via minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), complemented by PCI to non-LAD vessels. This approach avoids a full sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass while preserving the advantages of surgical revascularisation. Patient selection for HCR should be guided by a multidisciplinary heart team, targeting those with severe LAD disease and suitable non-LAD lesions for PCI. This review outlines the surgical techniques, anticoagulation strategies, and procedural sequencing employed in HCR, along with real-world outcomes from observational studies and randomised trials. While current evidence supports the safety and feasibility of HCR in appropriately selected patients, further large-scale randomised trials are needed to clarify its role in comparison to standalone CABG or PCI.
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.