JTCS KCI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Massimo Caputo
Barnaby C. Reeves
Gianni D. Angelini
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Caputo, M.
Right arrow Articles by Angelini, G. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Caputo, M.
Right arrow Articles by Angelini, G. D.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;127:891-892
© 2004 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery

Letter to the editor

Radial versus right internal thoracic artery for myocardial revascularization

Massimo Caputo, MDa, Barnaby C. Reeves, DPhilb, Gianni D. Angelini, FRCSa

a Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol , United Kingdom
b Health Services Research Unit, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

To the Editor:

Buxton and colleagues1 recently reported interim results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of alternative conduits for the second graft in patients having coronary artery bypass grafting. They concluded that "the 5-year interim results do not support the hypothesis that the radial artery (RA) has superior patency to or is associated with fewer clinical events than free right internal thoracic (RITA) or saphenous vein (SV) grafts." We argue below that this conclusion is misleading.

First, the paper does not present 5-year results. The last patient was recruited 2 months before the paper was received. The median duration of follow-up is not stated but from the Kaplan Meier graphs appears to be about 2.5 years. Plotting survival graphs when few patients remain at risk disguises the imprecision of the estimates at . . . [Full Text of this Article]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 2004 by The American Association for Thoracic Surgery.