Dataset Information

Multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in ESRD.

ABSTRACT: Thirty to sixty percent of patients with ESRD on dialysis have coronary heart disease, but the optimal strategy for coronary revascularization is unknown. We used data from the United States Renal Data System to define a cohort of 21,981 patients on maintenance dialysis who received initial coronary revascularization with either coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1997 and 2009 and had at least 6 months of prior Medicare coverage as their primary payer. The primary outcome was death from any cause, and the secondary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction. Overall survival rates were consistently poor during the study period, with unadjusted 5-year survival rates of 22%-25% irrespective of revascularization strategy. Using multivariable-adjusted proportional hazards regression, we found that CABG compared with PCI associated with significantly lower risks for both death (HR=0.87, 95% CI=0.84-0.90) and the composite of death or myocardial infarction (HR=0.88, 95% CI=0.86-0.91). Results were similar in analyses using a propensity score-matched cohort. In the absence of data from randomized trials, these results suggest that CABG may be preferred over PCI for multivessel coronary revascularization in appropriately selected patients on maintenance dialysis.

SUBMITTER: Chang TI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3507369 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in ESRD.

Chang Tara I TI Shilane David D Kazi Dhruv S DS Montez-Rath Maria E ME Hlatky Mark A MA Winkelmayer Wolfgang C WC

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN 20121201 12

Thirty to sixty percent of patients with ESRD on dialysis have coronary heart disease, but the optimal strategy for coronary revascularization is unknown. We used data from the United States Renal Data System to define a cohort of 21,981 patients on maintenance dialysis who received initial coronary revascularization with either coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1997 and 2009 and had at least 6 months of prior Medicare coverage as their pr ...[more]

PMID: 23204445

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe concept of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines the left internal mammary artery (LIMA)-left anterior descending (LAD) graft and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to non-LAD vessels. Multiple comparative studies have evaluated the safety and feasibility of HCR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery disease (MCAD). However, the sample size of each study was small, and evidences based on single-institutional experience. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term outcomes of HCR with those of CABG for MCAD.MethodPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, as well as conference proceedings, were searched for eligible studies published up to March 2014. We calculated summary odds ratios (OR) for primary endpoints (death, stroke; myocardial infarction (MI); target vessel revascularization (TVR); major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs)) and secondary endpoints (atrial fibrillation (AF); renal failure; length of stay in the intensive care unit (LoS in ICU); length of stay in hospital (LoS in hospital); red blood cell (RBC) transfusion). Data from 6176 participants were derived from ten cohort studies.ResultsHCR was non-inferior to CABG in terms of MACCEs during hospitalization (odds ratio (OR), 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-1.33)and at one-year follow-up(0.32, 0.05-1.89) , and no significant difference was found between HCR and CABG groups in in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcomes of death, MI, stroke, the prevalence of AF and renal failure, whereas HCR was associated with a lower requirement of RBC transfusion and shorter LoS in ICU and LoS in hospital than CABG (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.25, 95% CI, -1.62 to -0.88; -17.47, -31.01 to -3.93; -1.77, -3.07 to -0.46; respectively).ConclusionOur meta-analysis indicates that HCR is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of MCAD, with similar in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcome, significantly lower requirement of RBC transfusion, and faster recovery compared with CABG.

Dataset Information

Multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in ESRD.

Publications

Multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in ESRD.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets