Use of Aspirin and Clopidogrel After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. DATA SOURCES: Literature was accessed through PubMed (1950-November 2011), EMBASE (1976-November 2011), and the Cochrane databases using the terms clopidogrel and coronary artery bypass graft. Citations from available articles were used for additional references and ClinicalTrials.gov was accessed for abstracts of ongoing studies. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Peer-reviewed studies that evaluated DAPT use after CABG surgery in adult humans were assessed for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four randomized clinical trials evaluating surrogate end points and 9 studies (3 subgroup analyses, 6 observational) evaluating clinical outcomes were reviewed. Three clinical trials assessing surrogate end points failed to demonstrate an improvement in graft patency with DAPT use, while 1 clinical trial found an increase in graft patency. As for clinical outcomes, 1 subgroup analysis demonstrated that the benefit of DAPT post-CABG after a non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome diminished following surgery, while an observational study demonstrated a trend toward decreased mortality. In post-CABG patients who did not experience acute coronary syndrome, 2 subgroup analyses proved inconclusive and an observational study found DAPT use to be associated with reducing in-hospital mortality, while another observational study was not associated with reduced long-term mortality. Three observational studies in off-pump CABG patients showed that DAPT use was feasible. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for DAPT use following CABG is limited to subgroup analyses, observational studies, and trials with surrogate end points. The majority of clinical trials have failed to demonstrate an improvement in graft patency with DAPT. Current evidence does not support the use of DAPT to improve graft patency, and more evidence from randomized controlled trials assessing clinical outcomes is necessary to make definitive recommendations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".