↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting According to Lesion Site Results From the EXCEL Trial

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
58 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting According to Lesion Site Results From the EXCEL Trial
Published in
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, July 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.040
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony H. Gershlick, David E. Kandzari, Amerjeet Banning, David P. Taggart, Marie-Claude Morice, Nicholas J. Lembo, W. Morris Brown, Adrian P. Banning, Béla Merkely, Ferenc Horkay, Ad J. van Boven, Piet W. Boonstra, Ovidiu Dressler, Joseph F. Sabik, Patrick W. Serruys, Arie Pieter Kappetein, Gregg W. Stone

Abstract

The authors sought to determine the extent to which the site of the left main coronary artery (LM) lesion (distal bifurcation versus ostial/shaft) influences the outcomes of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Among 1,905 patients with LM disease and site-assessed SYNTAX scores of <32 randomized in the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, revascularization with PCI and CABG resulted in similar rates of the composite primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 3 years. Outcomes from the randomized EXCEL trial were analyzed according to the presence of angiographic core laboratory-determined diameter stenosis ≥50% involving the distal LM bifurcation (n = 1,559; 84.2%) versus disease isolated to the LM ostium or shaft (n = 293; 15.8%). At 3 years, there were no significant differences between PCI and CABG for the primary composite endpoint of death, MI, or stroke for treatment of both distal LM bifurcation disease (15.6% vs. 14.9%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81 to 1.42; p = 0.61) and isolated LM ostial/shaft disease (12.4% vs. 13.5%, OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.81; p = 0.77) (pinteraction = 0.65). However, at 3 years, ischemia-driven revascularization occurred more frequently after PCI than CABG in patients with LM distal bifurcation disease (13.0% vs. 7.2%, OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.41 to 2.85; p = 0.0001), but were not significantly different in patients with disease only at the LM ostium or shaft (9.7% vs. 8.4%, OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.52 to 2.69; p = 0.68) (pinteraction = 0.25). In the EXCEL trial, PCI and CABG resulted in comparable rates of death, MI, or stroke at 3 years for treatment of LM disease, including those with distal LM bifurcation disease. Repeat revascularization rates during follow-up after PCI compared with CABG were greater for lesions in the distal LM bifurcation but were similar for disease isolated to the LM ostium or shaft.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 23 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 31 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2019.
All research outputs
#994,334
of 25,578,098 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#352
of 4,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,150
of 342,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#13
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,578,098 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,080 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.