BACKGROUND: Patients requiring chronic hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stents. Outcome data on drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in HD patients are limited and suggest superiority of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) over limus-eluting stents (LES). METHODS: In total, 218 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled. A comparison of post-PCI outcomes up to 2 years was carried out between patients receiving PES (n=62) and LES (n=156; SES n=112, EES n=44). The primary end point was 2-year major adverse cardiac events [MACE; death, Q-wave myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization (TLR)]. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable. The overall prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 71%. On clinical follow-up to 2 years, MACE rates were similar [PES 32/51 (62.7%) vs. LES 77/132 (58.3%), p=0.59]; however, clinically-driven revascularization occurred more than twice as frequently in LES patients: TLR [PES 4/36 (11.1%) vs. LES 24/93 (25.8%), p=0.07] and target vessel revascularization [5/37 (13.5%) vs. 33/96 (34.4%), p=0.02]. Given that overall mortality was nominally higher for PES patients [31/50 (62.0%) vs. 61/127 (48.0%), p=0.09], a competing outcome analysis was implemented for TLR against mortality, which demonstrated that the trend for increased TLR with LES was no longer apparent (p=0.282). On multivariable adjustment, only diabetes mellitus was independently associated with TLR (use of PES was not). CONCLUSIONS: Patients on chronic HD experience high rates of clinically driven TLR despite DES implantation. Use of PES does not demonstrate a significant advantage over LES in this population.
BACKGROUND:Patients requiring chronic hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stents. Outcome data on drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in HDpatients are limited and suggest superiority of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) over limus-eluting stents (LES). METHODS: In total, 218 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled. A comparison of post-PCI outcomes up to 2 years was carried out between patients receiving PES (n=62) and LES (n=156; SES n=112, EES n=44). The primary end point was 2-year major adverse cardiac events [MACE; death, Q-wave myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization (TLR)]. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable. The overall prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 71%. On clinical follow-up to 2 years, MACE rates were similar [PES 32/51 (62.7%) vs. LES 77/132 (58.3%), p=0.59]; however, clinically-driven revascularization occurred more than twice as frequently in LES patients: TLR [PES 4/36 (11.1%) vs. LES 24/93 (25.8%), p=0.07] and target vessel revascularization [5/37 (13.5%) vs. 33/96 (34.4%), p=0.02]. Given that overall mortality was nominally higher for PES patients [31/50 (62.0%) vs. 61/127 (48.0%), p=0.09], a competing outcome analysis was implemented for TLR against mortality, which demonstrated that the trend for increased TLR with LES was no longer apparent (p=0.282). On multivariable adjustment, only diabetes mellitus was independently associated with TLR (use of PES was not). CONCLUSIONS:Patients on chronic HD experience high rates of clinically driven TLR despite DES implantation. Use of PES does not demonstrate a significant advantage over LES in this population.