Observational studyOpen heart2026
Incidence of post-procedural atrial fibrillation after multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting: a nationwide observational study.
Observational study in Open heart, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) but is less well characterised after multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI). With the increasing use of MV-PCI, we compared the incidence and clinical implications of clinically significant post-procedural AF following MV-PCI versus CABG.
methodsIn this nationwide observational study, we analysed data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry and the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. We included all patients in Sweden with chronic coronary syndrome who underwent MV-PCI or isolated CABG between August 2013 and October 2020, excluding those with prior AF or oral anticoagulant (OAC) use in the preceding year. Clinically significant post-procedural AF was defined using a treatment-based proxy: a new OAC dispensation within 3 months after the procedure, with persistence at 9 months. The primary outcome was post-procedural AF incidence at 90 days; secondary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction, major bleeding and all-cause mortality.
resultsA total of 4471 patients undergoing MV-PCI and 2232 undergoing CABG were included. Post-procedural AF occurred in 0.6% after MV-PCI and 5.7% after CABG (adjusted risk ratio 15.02; 95% CI 8.72 to 25.87; p<0.001). MV-PCI patients were older and had more comorbidities, whereas CABG patients had higher rates of diabetes and more extensive coronary disease. At 90 days, all-cause mortality and major bleeding did not differ significantly. Myocardial infarction was more common after MV-PCI (1.1 vs 0.4%), whereas stroke was more frequent after CABG (0.6 vs 0.3%).
conclusionsClinically significant post-procedural AF, defined by initiation and persistence of OAC therapy, was nearly tenfold more common after CABG than after MV-PCI. This association remained robust after multivariable adjustment for demographics, comorbidities and angiographic/severity-related factors. Differences in clinical outcomes were modest and should be interpreted cautiously.
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.