GuidelineJournal of cardiovascular translational research2015
Perspectives on the 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on Myocardial Revascularization : Fifty Years of Revascularization: Where Are We and Where Are We Heading?
Guideline in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03227588 (Evaluation of the Opsens Fractional Flow Reserve), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Evaluation of the Opsens Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Wire as a "Work Horse" Wire
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Current indications for the intrathoracic transposition of the omentum.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2019Review
- The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stent implantation: to go too far is as bad as to fall short.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2018Review
- Review
- Current trends in selection of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2017Review
- Evaluation of safety and efficacy of elective PCI in patients with cardiac insufficiency.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2017Article
- The role of coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy in the current era.Journal of thoracic disease · 2016Article
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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The joint European Society of Cardiology and European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines on myocardial revascularization collect and summarize the evidence regarding decision-making, diagnostics, and therapeutics in various clinical scenarios of coronary artery disease, including elective, urgent, and emergency settings. The 2014 document updates and extends the effort started in 2010, year of the first edition of these guidelines. Importantly, this latest edition provides a systematic review of all randomized clinical trials performed since 1980, comparing different strategies of myocardial revascularization, including coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), balloon angioplasty, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare-metal stents (BMS) and first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). This review aims to highlight the most relevant novelties introduced by the 2014 edition of the ESC/EACTS myocardial revascularization guidelines as compared with the previous edition and to describe similarities and differences with the American societies' guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.