ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Comparable survival over an extended follow-up after on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a propensity score-matched cohort.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-term survival following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) compared with conventional on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (ONCAB) remains uncertain. Randomised trials and meta-analyses up to 5-10 years after procedures have demonstrated either no significant differences or modest disadvantages of OPCAB, particularly regarding completeness of revascularisation and late mortality. However, comparative data extending up to 20 years after procedure are scarce. Thus, very-long-term outcomes after ONCAB versus OPCAB in a propensity score-matched cohort were evaluated.
methodsConsecutive adults undergoing isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting between 1999 and 2016 at a single cardiac surgery centre were retrospectively identified. Patients undergoing isolated OPCAB or ONCAB procedures were included and matched in a 1:2 ratio using clinically relevant preoperative variables. The primary outcome was overall survival in the matched cohort analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression.
resultsDuring the study period, 2,935 patients underwent isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), of whom 2,496 (85.0%) underwent ONCAB and 439 (15.0%) OPCAB procedures. Median survival time was 13.7 years (95% CI 13.2-14.2) and median follow-up was 12.3 years (interquartile range 8.0-17.1, maximum 23.9 years). The matched cohort consisted of 402 OPCAB patients matched to 804 ONCAB patients. Median survival time was 12.4 years (95% CI 11.9-13.2) in ONCAB and 12.6 years (95% CI 11.5-13.8) in OPCAB patients. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82-1.11; ONCAB as reference). No significant differences were observed in the cumulative incidence of cardiovascular mortality.
conclusionIn this propensity score-matched cohort with follow-up extending up to 20 years, ONCAB and OPCAB were associated with comparable long-term survival and cardiovascular mortality. These findings support an individualised approach to operative technique selection based on patient characteristics 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.