SynthesisCardiovascular drugs and therapy2025
Off-pump Versus On-pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Diabetic patients: A Meta-analysis of Observational Studies with a Propensity-Score Analysis.
Synthesis in Cardiovascular drugs and therapy, 2025. 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.
- Endpoint Inconsistency and Overinterpretation of Early Biomarkers After CABG.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
- OPCAB in the minimally invasive era: impact on wound complications-a comparative study with on-pump CABG.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe debate between off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (ONCAB) in diabetic patients remains. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate outcomes after OPCAB versus ONCAB for patients with diabetes.
methodsLiterature research was conducted up to December 2023 using Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies were observational studies with a propensity-score analysis of OPCAB versus ONCAB. The primary outcomes were early mortality and mid-term survival. The secondary outcomes were cerebrovascular accidents, reoperation for bleeding, incomplete revascularization, myocardial infarction, low cardiac output, and renal replacement therapy.
resultsOur research identified seven observational studies with a propensity-score analysis enrolling 13,085 patients. There was no significant difference between OPCAB and ONCAB for early mortality, mid-term survival, myocardial infarction, low cardiac output, and renal replacement therapy. OPCAB was associated with a lower risk of cerebrovascular accidents (OR 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.76, P = 0.004) and reoperation for bleeding (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.88, P = 0.009). However, OPCAB was associated with a higher risk of incomplete revascularization (OR 2.07; 95% CI, 1.60-2.68, P < 0.00001).
conclusionAmong patients with diabetes, no difference in early mortality and mid-term survival was observed. However, OPCAB was associated with a lower incidence of morbidity, including cerebrovascular accidents and reoperation for bleeding.
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.