GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) (5) assessment of included studies
| Outcome | No. of participants (studies)* | Certainty of evidence (GRADE) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Expected absolute effects | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk per 1000 with C-CABG† | Risk difference with RCAB | ||||
| Length of hospital stay | 1066 (7) | ⊕○○○ Very low‡§¶ | — | Not pooled | Not pooled |
| Late myocardial infarction | 286 (1) | ⊕○○○ Very low**†† | Not estimable | 41 | 41 fewer per 1000 (41 fewer to 41 fewer) |
| Late stroke | 200 (1) | ⊕⊕○○ Low†† | Not estimable | 20 | 20 fewer per 1000 (20 fewer to 20 fewer) |
| Overall survival | 286 (1) | ⊕○○○ Very low††‡‡ | Not estimable | 707 | 707 fewer per 1000 (707 fewer to 707 fewer) |
| Postoperative pain score | 187(2) | ⊕○○○ Very low§§¶¶ | — | Not pooled | Not pooled |
| Readmission rate | 484 (2) | ⊕○○○ Very low¶†† | Not pooled | Not pooled | Not pooled |
| Revascularization rate | 524 (3) | ⊕○○○ Very low‡††‡‡ | Not estimable | 27 | 27 fewer per 1000 (27 fewer to 27 fewer) |
C-CABG = conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (median sternotomy); CI = confidence interval; RCAB = robotic coronary artery bypass.
↵* Observational in all cases.
↵† The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
↵‡ Most studies failed to control for confounding variables.
↵§ Mean difference varied from 1 to 7 days.
↵¶ Lack of information on surgeon’s experience.
↵** Lack of control for confounding variables, study at high risk of selection bias.
↵†† Low event rate.
↵‡‡ Study at high risk of selection bias.
↵§§ Lack of control for confounding variables, study at high risk of performance bias.
↵¶¶ Small sample.