Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35655530›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022

Safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in patients with STEMI and unprotected left main stem disease: A systematic review & meta-analysis.

Talal Almas, Ahson Afzal, Hameeda Fatima, Sadia Yaqoob, Furqan Ahmad Jarullah, Zaeem Ahmed Abbasi, Anoosh Farooqui, Duaa Jaffar, Atiya Batool, Shayan Ahmed and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Talal AlmasDepartment of Medicine, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
Ahson AfzalDepartment of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Hameeda FatimaDepartment of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Sadia YaqoobDepartment of Medicine, Jinnah Medical & Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Furqan Ahmad JarullahDepartment of Medicine, Jinnah Medical & Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Zaeem Ahmed AbbasiDepartment of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Anoosh FarooquiDepartment of Medicine, United Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Duaa JaffarDepartment of Medicine, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Atiya BatoolDepartment of Medicine, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Shayan AhmedDepartment of Medicine, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Neha Sara AzmatDepartment of Medicine, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Fatima AfzalDepartment of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Sarah Zafar KhanDepartment of Medicine, Karachi Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan.
Kaneez FatimaDepartment of Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Dow University of Health Sciences · PKShaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical University · PKJinnah Medical & Dental College · PKKarachi Medical and Dental College · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Owing to its large area of supply, left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) has the highest mortality rate among coronary artery lesions, resulting in debate about its optimal revascularization technique. This Method: MEDLINE, TRIP, and Cochrane Central databases were queried from their inception until 25 April 2021, to determine MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events), all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke rates post-revascularization for different follow-ups. 7 RCTs and 50 observational studies having 56,701 patients were included. A random-effects model was used with effect sizes calculated as odds ratios (odds ratio, OR). Results: In the Conclusion: PCI was safer than CABG for patients with stroke for most follow-ups, while CABG was associated with lower repeat revascularizations. However, further research is required to determine PCI's safety over CABG for reducing post-surgery MI.

Indexed as

Coronary artery bypass graftMeta-analysisPercutaneous coronary interventionUnprotected left main coronary artery disease

Identifiers

PMID35655530
PMCPMC9152298
OpenAlexW4224324416

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.