The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data.
Open accessAbstract
CASS includes a multicenter patient registry and a randomized controlled clinical trial. It is designed to assess the effect of coronary artery bypass surgery on mortality and selected nonfatal end points. From August 1975 to May 1979, 780 patients with stable ischemic heart disease were randomly assigned to receive surgical (n = 390) or nonsurgical (n = 390) treatment and were followed through April 15, 1983. At 5 years, the average annual mortality rate in patients assigned to surgical treatment was 1.1%. The annual mortality rate in those receiving medical therapy was 1.6%. Annual mortality rates in patients with single-, double-, and triple-vessel disease who were in the surgical group were 0.7%, 1.0%, and 1.5%; the corresponding rates in patients in the medical group were 1.4%, 1.2%, and 2.1%. The differences were not statistically significant. Nearly 75% of the patients had entry ejection fractions of at least 0.50. The annual mortality rates in patients in the surgical group in this subgroup with single-, double-, and triple-vessel disease were 0.8%, 0.8%, and 1.2% and corresponding rates in the medical group were 1.1%, 0.6%, and 1.2%. The annual rate of bypass surgery in patients who were initially assigned to receive medical treatment was 4.7%. The excellent survival rates observed both in CASS patients assigned to receive medical and those assigned to receive surgical therapy and the similarity of survival rates in the two groups of patients in this randomized trial lead to the conclusion that patients similar to those enrolled in this trial can safely defer bypass surgery until symptoms worsen to the point that surgical palliation is required.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure
Yancy, C. W., Jessup, M., Bozkurt, B., Butler, J., Casey, D. E., Drazner, M. H., Fonarow, G. C., Geraci, S. A., Horwich, T., Januzzi, J. L., et al. (2013) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.05.019 · Cited by 12,536
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes
Vrints, C., Andreotti, F., Koskinas, K. C., Rossello, X., Adamo, M., Ainslie, J., Banning, A. P., Budaj, A., Buechel, R. R., Chiariello, G. A., et al. (2024) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177 · Cited by 2,774
Yancy, C. W., Jessup, M., Bozkurt, B., Butler, J., Casey, D. E., Drazner, M. H., Fonarow, G. C., Geraci, S. A., Horwich, T., Januzzi, J. L., et al. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31829e8776 · Cited by 2,106
Surrogate End Points in Clinical Trials: Are We Being Misled?
Fleming, T. R., & DeMets, D. L. (1996) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-125-7-199610010-00011 · Cited by 1,651
Buchwald, H., Varco, R. L., Matts, J. P., Long, J. M., Fitch, L. L., Campbell, G. S., Pearce, M. B., Yellin, A. E., Edmiston, W. A., Smink, R. D., et al. (1990) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199010043231404 · Cited by 1,001
Metadata
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 1983-11
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 939-950
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2471763088
- Cited by
- 1,199
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 95.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.68.5.939
- The paper
- Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data. (1983). Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.68.5.939
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.