Tara I Chang1, Maria E Montez-Rath2, Thomas T Tsai3, Mark A Hlatky2, Wolfgang C Winkelmayer4. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. Electronic address: tichang@stanford.edu. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 3. Interventional Cardiology & Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, Colorado; Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. 4. Department of Medicine, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients undergoingpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce repeat revascularizations compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), but their effects on death and myocardial infarction (MI) are mixed. Few studies have focused on patients with end-stage renal disease. OBJECTIVES: This study compared mortality and cardiovascular morbidity during percutaneous coronary intervention with DES and with BMS in dialysis patients. METHODS: We identified 36,117 dialysis patients from the USRDS (United States Renal Data System) who had coronary stenting in the United States between April 23, 2003, and December 31, 2010, and examined the association of DES versus BMS with 1-year outcomes: death; death or MI; and death, MI, or repeat revascularization. We also conducted a temporal analysis by dividing the study period into 3 DES eras: Transitional (April 23, 2003, to June 30, 2004); Liberal (July 1, 2004, to December 31, 2006); and Selective (January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010). RESULTS: One-year event rates were high, with 38 deaths; 55 death or MI events; and 71 death, MI, or repeat revascularization events per 100 person-years. DES, compared with BMS, were associated with a significant 18% lower risk of death; 16% lower risk of death or MI; and 13% lower risk of death, MI, or repeat revascularization. DES use varied, from 56% in the Transitional era to 85% in the Liberal era and 62% in the Selective era. DES outcomes in the Liberal era were significantly better than in the Transitional Era, but not significantly better than in the Selective Era. CONCLUSIONS: DES for percutaneous coronary intervention appears to be safe for use in U.S. dialysis patients and is associated with lower rates of death, MI, and repeat revascularization.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce repeat revascularizations compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), but their effects on death and myocardial infarction (MI) are mixed. Few studies have focused on patients with end-stage renal disease. OBJECTIVES: This study compared mortality and cardiovascular morbidity during percutaneous coronary intervention with DES and with BMS in dialysis patients. METHODS: We identified 36,117 dialysis patients from the USRDS (United States Renal Data System) who had coronary stenting in the United States between April 23, 2003, and December 31, 2010, and examined the association of DES versus BMS with 1-year outcomes: death; death or MI; and death, MI, or repeat revascularization. We also conducted a temporal analysis by dividing the study period into 3 DES eras: Transitional (April 23, 2003, to June 30, 2004); Liberal (July 1, 2004, to December 31, 2006); and Selective (January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010). RESULTS: One-year event rates were high, with 38 deaths; 55 death or MI events; and 71 death, MI, or repeat revascularization events per 100 person-years. DES, compared with BMS, were associated with a significant 18% lower risk of death; 16% lower risk of death or MI; and 13% lower risk of death, MI, or repeat revascularization. DES use varied, from 56% in the Transitional era to 85% in the Liberal era and 62% in the Selective era. DES outcomes in the Liberal era were significantly better than in the Transitional Era, but not significantly better than in the Selective Era. CONCLUSIONS: DES for percutaneous coronary intervention appears to be safe for use in U.S. dialysis patients and is associated with lower rates of death, MI, and repeat revascularization.
Authors: Thomas T Tsai; John C Messenger; J Matthew Brennan; Uptal D Patel; David Dai; Robert N Piana; Kevin J Anstrom; Eric L Eisenstein; Rachel S Dokholyan; Eric D Peterson; Pamela S Douglas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-10-25 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Lakshmi Venkitachalam; Yang Lei; Elizabeth A Magnuson; Paul S Chan; Joshua M Stolker; Kevin F Kennedy; Neal S Kleiman; David J Cohen Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2011-10-11
Authors: Robert W Yeh; Samip Vasaiwala; Daniel E Forman; Treacy S Silbaugh; Katya Zelevinski; Ann Lovett; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Laura Mauri Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2013-11-19
Authors: Tara I Chang; David Shilane; Dhruv S Kazi; Maria E Montez-Rath; Mark A Hlatky; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Steven M Brunelli; Joshua J Gagne; Krista F Huybrechts; Shirley V Wang; Amanda R Patrick; Kenneth J Rothman; John D Seeger Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2013-03-22 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Sripal Bangalore; Sunil Kumar; Mario Fusaro; Nicholas Amoroso; Michael J Attubato; Frederick Feit; Deepak L Bhatt; James Slater Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-05-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Tara I Chang; Maria E Montez-Rath; Jenny I Shen; Matthew D Solomon; Glenn M Chertow; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 5.501