Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Percutaneous and Surgical Treatment of Multivessel Coronary Disease Patients: Insights From the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Trial

Open access
Abizaid, Alexandre, Costa, Marco A., Centemero, Marinella, Abizaid, Andrea S., Legrand, Victor M.G., Limet, Robert V., Schuler, Gerhard, Mohr, Friedrich W., Lindeboom, Wietze, Sousa, Amanda G.M.R., Sousa, J. Eduardo, van Hout, Ben, Hugenholtz, Paul G., Unger, Felix, Serruys, Patrick W.·2001·Circulation

Abstract

Background Our aims were to compare coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and stenting for the treatment of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease enrolled in the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) trial and to determine the costs of these 2 treatment strategies. Methods and Results Patients (n=1205) were randomly assigned to stent implantation (n=600; diabetic, 112) or CABG (n=605; diabetic, 96). Costs per patient were calculated as the product of each patient’s use of resources and the corresponding unit costs. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. At 1 year, diabetic patients treated with stenting had the lowest event-free survival rate (63.4%) because of a higher incidence of repeat revascularization compared with both diabetic patients treated with CABG (84.4%, P <0.001) and nondiabetic patients treated with stents (76.2%, P =0.04). Conversely, diabetic and nondiabetic patients experienced similar 1-year event-free survival rates when treated with CABG (84.4% and 88.4%). The total 1-year costs for stenting and CABG in diabetic patients were $12 855 and $16 585 ( P <0.001) and in the nondiabetic groups, $10 164 for stenting and $13 082 for surgery. Conclusions Multivessel diabetic patients treated with stenting had a worse 1-year outcome than patients assigned to CABG or nondiabetics treated with stenting. The strategy of stenting was less costly than CABG, however, regardless of diabetic status.

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 · 10.1161/hc3101.093700

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Abizaid, A., Costa, M. A., Centemero, M., Abizaid, A. S., Legrand, V. M. G., Limet, R. V., Schuler, G., Mohr, F. W., Lindeboom, W., Sousa, A. G. M. R., Sousa, J. E., van Hout, B., Hugenholtz, P. G., Unger, F., & Serruys, P. W.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2001-07-31
Volume
104
Issue
5
Pages
533-538
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2051686671
Cited by
337
References
30
FWCI
23.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Clinical and Economic Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Percutaneous and Surgical Treatment of Multivessel Coronary Disease Patients: Insights From the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/hc3101.093700
The paper
Abizaid, A., Costa, M. A., Centemero, M., Abizaid, A. S., Legrand, V. M. G., Limet, R. V., Schuler, G., Mohr, F. W., Lindeboom, W., Sousa, A. G. M. R., Sousa, J. E., van Hout, B., Hugenholtz, P. G., Unger, F., & Serruys, P. W. (2001). Clinical and Economic Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Percutaneous and Surgical Treatment of Multivessel Coronary Disease Patients: Insights From the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Trial. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/hc3101.093700

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.