FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2037662925> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2037662925 endingPage "1334" @default.
• W2037662925 startingPage "1328" @default.
• W2037662925 abstract "BackgroundA survival benefit of radial artery use versus saphenous vein grafting in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been reported. We aimed to elucidate the relative radial artery survival benefit as a function of time after surgery from two independent CABG series.MethodsWe compared 0- to 15-year survival with radial artery versus saphenous vein grafting in isolated, nonsalvage primary CABG with left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending from two institutions: Ohio (radial artery [n = 2,361; 61 years]; saphenous vein [n = 2,547; 67 years]), and New York (radial artery [n = 1,970; 58 years]; saphenous vein [n = 2,974; 69 years]). Separate multivariate radial artery–use propensity models based on demographic, preoperative factors, intraoperative variables, and completeness of revascularization data were computed and used to derive propensity- and sex-matched CABG cohorts (1,799 [Ohio] and 995 [New York] pairs). A three-phase (early and late) mortality model was fit to Kaplan-Meier mortality estimates and used to derive relative radial artery versus saphenous vein hazard functions.ResultsRadial artery use patterns and patient risk profiles differed substantially for New York and Ohio, with the New York radial artery cohort significantly younger and more male. Within-institution matched graft-type cohorts were well matched. Cumulative mortality was significantly better for radial artery at both institutions (p < 0.001 both). All mortality-time data were well described by the three-phase model, and the derived relative hazard functions were qualitatively and quantitatively similar for New York and Ohio, exhibiting maximal benefit between 0.5 and 5 years.ConclusionsDespite substantial differences in radial artery use patterns during a 15-year period, our analysis in large propensity-matched radial artery and saphenous vein cohorts yielded remarkably similar, time-varying radial artery to saphenous vein survival benefit at both institutions. These converging findings based on two independent patient series extend currently available objective evidence in support of a radial artery survival advantage in CABG. A survival benefit of radial artery use versus saphenous vein grafting in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been reported. We aimed to elucidate the relative radial artery survival benefit as a function of time after surgery from two independent CABG series. We compared 0- to 15-year survival with radial artery versus saphenous vein grafting in isolated, nonsalvage primary CABG with left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending from two institutions: Ohio (radial artery [n = 2,361; 61 years]; saphenous vein [n = 2,547; 67 years]), and New York (radial artery [n = 1,970; 58 years]; saphenous vein [n = 2,974; 69 years]). Separate multivariate radial artery–use propensity models based on demographic, preoperative factors, intraoperative variables, and completeness of revascularization data were computed and used to derive propensity- and sex-matched CABG cohorts (1,799 [Ohio] and 995 [New York] pairs). A three-phase (early and late) mortality model was fit to Kaplan-Meier mortality estimates and used to derive relative radial artery versus saphenous vein hazard functions. Radial artery use patterns and patient risk profiles differed substantially for New York and Ohio, with the New York radial artery cohort significantly younger and more male. Within-institution matched graft-type cohorts were well matched. Cumulative mortality was significantly better for radial artery at both institutions (p < 0.001 both). All mortality-time data were well described by the three-phase model, and the derived relative hazard functions were qualitatively and quantitatively similar for New York and Ohio, exhibiting maximal benefit between 0.5 and 5 years. Despite substantial differences in radial artery use patterns during a 15-year period, our analysis in large propensity-matched radial artery and saphenous vein cohorts yielded remarkably similar, time-varying radial artery to saphenous vein survival benefit at both institutions. These converging findings based on two independent patient series extend currently available objective evidence in support of a radial artery survival advantage in CABG." @default.
• W2037662925 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5021128897 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5029994490 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5042606546 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5044218794 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5044373584 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5054761754 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5067986943 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5086275658 @default.
• W2037662925 creator A5088381023 @default.
• W2037662925 date "2014-04-01" @default.
• W2037662925 modified "2023-10-09" @default.
• W2037662925 title "Time-Varying Survival Benefit of Radial Artery Versus Vein Grafting: A Multiinstitutional Analysis" @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1910901462 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1946152282 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1964759611 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1967931529 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1976114675 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1980505117 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1982755382 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W1999079280 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2002507762 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2012102528 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2021027840 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2022291211 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2031840696 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2033732335 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2049491523 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2055505988 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2069213539 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2086320401 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2108342229 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2114297726 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2134198789 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2149692562 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2154555522 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2159708107 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2162510814 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2169385272 @default.
• W2037662925 cites W2616974851 @default.
• W2037662925 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.09.096" @default.
• W2037662925 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24360093" @default.
• W2037662925 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2037662925 type Work @default.
• W2037662925 sameAs 2037662925 @default.
• W2037662925 citedByCount "28" @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252014 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252015 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252016 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252017 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252018 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252020 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252021 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252022 @default.
• W2037662925 countsByYear W20376629252023 @default.
• W2037662925 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5021128897 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5029994490 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5042606546 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5044218794 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5044373584 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5054761754 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5067986943 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5086275658 @default.
• W2037662925 hasAuthorship W2037662925A5088381023 @default.
• W2037662925 hasBestOaLocation W20376629251 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C17923572 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C207103383 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C2776820930 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C2777202286 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C2778218979 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C2779464278 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C2779670087 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C3017915907 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C500558357 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C50382708 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C126322002 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C141071460 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C164705383 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C17923572 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C207103383 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C2776820930 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C2777202286 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C2778218979 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C2779464278 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C2779670087 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C3017915907 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C44249647 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C500558357 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C50382708 @default.
• W2037662925 hasConceptScore W2037662925C71924100 @default.
• W2037662925 hasIssue "4" @default.

• next