Observational studyClinical cardiology2023
For patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and recurrent myocardial ischemia, percutaneous coronary intervention on bypass graft or native coronary artery?-A 5-year follow-up cohort study.
Observational study in Clinical cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- BMSC‑derived exosome‑mediated miR‑25‑3p delivery protects against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury by constraining M1‑like macrophage polarization.Molecular medicine reports · 2024Article
- For patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and recurrent myocardial ischemia, percutaneous coronary intervention on bypass graft or native coronary artery?-A 5-year follow-up cohort study.Clinical cardiology · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReal-world data on target vessel of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was still limited. HYPOTHESIS: A prospective cohort was examined to determine the frequency and outcomes of native coronary artery PCI versus bypass graft PCI in patients with prior CABG.
methodsA large-sample observational study enrolled a total of 10 724 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent PCI in 2013. Two- and five-year clinical outcomes were compared between graft PCI group and native artery PCI group in patients with prior CABG.
resultsA total of 438 cases had CABG history in the total cohort. Graft PCI group and native artery PCI group accounted for 13.7% and 86.3%, respectively. The rates of 2- and 5-year all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE) showed no significant difference between the two groups (p > .05). Two-year revascularization risk was lower in graft PCI group than native artery PCI group (3.3% and 12.4%, p < .05), but 5-year myocardial infarction (MI) risk was higher (13.3% and 5.0%, p < .05). In multivariate COX regression models, graft PCI group was independently associated with lower 2-year revascularization risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05-0.88; p = .033), but higher 5-year MI risk than native artery PCI group (HR: 2.61; 95% CI: 1.03-6.57; p = .042). Five-year all-cause death and MACCE risk showed no difference between the two groups in model.
conclusionsIn patients with prior CABG underwent PCI, patients in graft PCI group had higher 5-year MI risk than patients received native artery PCI. But, 5-year mortality and MACCE was not significantly different between graft PCI group and native artery PCI group.
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.