ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2026
Long-acting nitrate use before and after revascularization to evaluate angina in chronic coronary syndrome: a case-crossover study from SCAAR.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The ORBITA and ORBITA-2 trials have provided valuable insights into the effects of coronary revascularization in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). However, uncertainties remain regarding the efficacy of revascularization on symptoms in large real-world populations. To evaluate the efficacy of revascularization, we used dispensed long-acting nitrates as a proxy for the presence of angina. Methods: The Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) was used to identify all patients with CCS and at least one stenosis ≥50% undergoing angiography between the 1st of January 2014 and the 16th of January 2020. Four groups were defined based on treatment strategy: coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, complete revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), incomplete revascularization with PCI, and no revascularization. As patients in these treatment arms are inherently different, we employed a case-crossover design where each patient served as their own control with data collected during two periods: 1 year before up until angiography and 1-2 years after. This study design inherently controls for time-invariant confounding. The primary outcome was the use of long-acting nitrates defined as a dispensed prescription during the studied periods. Conditional Poisson regression was used to analyse the data. Findings: For this study, 15,955 patients were eligible. CABG, complete revascularization with PCI, and incomplete revascularization with PCI were associated with a decrease in dispensed prescriptions of long-acting nitrates (from 989/2218 [30.8%] to 156/3207 [4.9%]; risk-ratio (RR): 0.16 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.13-0.19]), (from 1676/7525 [22.3%] to 966/7525 [12.8%]; RR: 0.58 [95% CI: 0.53-0.62]), and (from 601/2180 [27.6%] to 495/2180 [22.7%]; RR: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.73-0.93]), respectively. No difference was observed for no revascularization (from 864/3043 [28.4%] to 856/3043 [28.1%]; RR: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.90-1.09]). Interpretation: Revascularization reduces the use of long-acting nitrates in patients with CCS, suggesting angina symptom improvement. CABG appears to provide a more significant effect than PCI, with complete PCI demonstrating greater effectiveness than incomplete revascularization. Funding: This work was supported by The Swedish Heart and Lung Foundation, ALF, Skane University Hospital funds, the Crafoord Foundation and the Swedish Medical Association.
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.