Is there equivalence between PCI and CABG surgery in long-term survival of patients with diabetes? Importance of interpretation biases and biological plausibility.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Aortic Stenosis: Diagnosis, Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Strategies-A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
   Review
2. Diabetes and calcific aortic valve disease: controversy of clinical outcomes in diabetes after aortic valve replacement.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025
   Review
3. 10 Years of SYNTAX: Closing an Era of Clinical Research After Identifying New Outcome Determinants.JACC. Asia · 2023
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Ten-year all-cause death after percutaneous or surgical revascularization in diabetic patients with complex coronary artery disease.2021

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as