BACKGROUND: Chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) is associated with an increased incidence of restenosis and stent thrombosis. Drug-eluting stents (DES), when compared to bare metal stents (BMS), reduce the incidence of restenosis in these patients. This study aimed to examine whether there are differences in clinical outcome after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with CRI who are subjected to coronary intervention. METHODS: A cohort of 570 patients with CRI who underwent intervention with DES (346 with SES and 224 with PES) were followed clinically up to 1 year and the clinical events were recorded and compared between groups. RESULTS: Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar, with a slightly higher number of diseased vessels in the SES group as compared to the PES group (2.3 +/- 0.9 vs 2.1 +/- 0.9, P = 0.06). The overall rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis were similar. The PES group had lower revascularization rates when compared to the SES group. After covariate adjustment, however, there was no difference seen in target vessel revascularization between stent types (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.3 [0.8-6.2], P = 0.110). The strongest predictor of death and MACE at 1 year was the number of diseased vessels. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CRI who undergo PCI with either SES or PES have similar repeat revascularization rates and acceptable stent thrombosis rates, although they continue to have high MACE and death rates.
BACKGROUND:Chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) is associated with an increased incidence of restenosis and stent thrombosis. Drug-eluting stents (DES), when compared to bare metal stents (BMS), reduce the incidence of restenosis in these patients. This study aimed to examine whether there are differences in clinical outcome after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with CRI who are subjected to coronary intervention. METHODS: A cohort of 570 patients with CRI who underwent intervention with DES (346 with SES and 224 with PES) were followed clinically up to 1 year and the clinical events were recorded and compared between groups. RESULTS: Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar, with a slightly higher number of diseased vessels in the SES group as compared to the PES group (2.3 +/- 0.9 vs 2.1 +/- 0.9, P = 0.06). The overall rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis were similar. The PES group had lower revascularization rates when compared to the SES group. After covariate adjustment, however, there was no difference seen in target vessel revascularization between stent types (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.3 [0.8-6.2], P = 0.110). The strongest predictor of death and MACE at 1 year was the number of diseased vessels. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with CRI who undergo PCI with either SES or PES have similar repeat revascularization rates and acceptable stent thrombosis rates, although they continue to have high MACE and death rates.