Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 528

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Randomized Comparison of Radial-Artery and Saphenous-Vein Coronary Bypass Grafts

Desai, Nimesh D., Cohen, Eric A., Naylor, C. David, Fremes, Stephen E.·2004·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, the radial artery has frequently been used for coronary bypass surgery despite concern regarding the possibility of graft spasm. Graft patency is a key predictor of long-term survival. We therefore sought to determine the relative patency rate of radial-artery and saphenous-vein grafts in a randomized trial in which we controlled for bias in the selection of patients and vessels. METHODS: We enrolled 561 patients at 13 centers. The left internal thoracic artery was used to bypass the anterior circulation. The radial-artery graft was randomly assigned to bypass the major vessel in either the inferior (right coronary) territory or the lateral (circumflex) territory, with the saphenous-vein graft used for the opposing territory (control). The primary end point was graft occlusion, determined by angiography 8 to 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Angiography was performed at one year in 440 patients: 8.2 percent of radial-artery grafts and 13.6 percent of saphenous-vein grafts were completely occluded (P=0.009). Diffuse narrowing of the graft (the angiographic "string sign") was present in 7.0 percent of radial-artery grafts and only 0.9 percent of saphenous-vein grafts (P=0.001). The absence of severe native-vessel stenosis was associated with an increased risk of occlusion of the radial-artery graft and diffuse narrowing of the graft. Harvesting of the radial artery was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Radial-artery grafts are associated with a lower rate of graft occlusion at one year than are saphenous-vein grafts. Because the patency of radial-artery grafts depends on the severity of native-vessel stenosis, such grafts should preferentially be used for target vessels with high-grade lesions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa040982

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 528

Metadata

Authors
Desai, N. D., Cohen, E. A., Naylor, C. D., & Fremes, S. E.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2004-11-25
Volume
351
Issue
22
Pages
2302-2309
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2093288623
Cited by
528
References
0
FWCI
30.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Randomized Comparison of Radial-Artery and Saphenous-Vein Coronary Bypass Grafts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa040982
The paper
Desai, N. D., Cohen, E. A., Naylor, C. D., & Fremes, S. E. (2004). A Randomized Comparison of Radial-Artery and Saphenous-Vein Coronary Bypass Grafts. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa040982

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.