ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2025
Long-term survival after multidisciplinary heart team-guided management of complex coronary artery disease.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Monitoring cardiac symptoms during teleprehabilitation prior to coronary artery bypass grafting: a digital cardiac counselling trial subanalysis.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Multivessel coronary artery disease: Teamwork makes the dream work.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025Article
- Insights from a multidisciplinary heart team for highest-risk valve disease.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary heart team approach for managing complex coronary artery disease (CAD), yet its impact on clinical outcomes and adherence to recommendations is rarely reported. Methods: Between June 2021 and August 2022, 210 high-risk patients with isolated, complex CAD were evaluated at our institution's weekly heart team conference for consideration of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), hybrid PCI/CABG, or optimal medical therapy (OMT). Adherence to recommendations and clinical outcomes, including 30-day, 1-year, and 2-year mortality, were assessed. Results: Overall adherence to heart team recommendations was 92%, with 96% adherence for CABG, 90% for PCI, 87% for OMT, and 75% for hybrid PCI/CABG. CABG was the most frequently recommended treatment (53%) and demonstrated the lowest mortality at 1 year (4%) and 2 years (6%) compared with PCI (1 year, 28%; 2 year, 40%) and OMT (1 year, 10%; 2 year, 20%). CABG patients had a lower-than-expected mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 0.9), while PCI was associated with significantly higher mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 3.0). Conclusion: This single-center multidisciplinary heart team approach for complex CAD offers a collaborative, patient-centered model that facilitates high adherence rates and favorable patient outcomes. These findings highlight the potential benefits of integrating multidisciplinary evaluation and support its implementation into standard practice for high-risk CAD patients.
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.