Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary artery intervention in patients on chronic hemodialysis: does a drug-eluting stent have an impact on clinical outcome?J Card Surg 2009 May-Jun; 24(3):234-9JC
Coronary revascularization methods continue to be refined, and the emergence of the drug-eluting stent (DES) has especially changed clinical practice related to ischemic heart disease. For chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients, however, the impact of DES on clinical outcome is yet to be determined. Forty-six consecutive chronic HD patients who underwent myocardial revascularization in our institute were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-eight patients underwent coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and 18 patients underwent percutaneous coronary artery intervention (PCI). Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. In the CABG group, bilateral internal thoracic artery (ITA) bypass grafting was performed in 27 patients and off-pump CABG was performed in 20 patients. In the PCI group, a DES was used in 12 patients. The number of coronary vessels treated per patient was higher in the CABG group (CABG: 4.25 +/- 1.32 vs. PCI: 1.44 +/- 0.78; p < 0.001). Two-year survival rates were similar between the two groups (CABG: 94.1% vs. PCI: 73.9%; p = 0.41), but major adverse cardiac event-free survival (CABG: 85.9% vs. PCI: 37.1%; p = 0.001) and angina-free survival (CABG: 84.9% vs. PCI: 28.9%; p < 0.001) rates were significantly higher in the CABG group. The one-year patency rate for the CABG grafts was 93.3% (left ITA: 100%, right ITA: 84.6%, sapenous vein: 90.9%, gastro-epiploic artery: 100%), and six-month restenosis rate for PCI was 57.1% (balloon angio-plasty: 75%, bare metal stent 40%, DES: 58.3%). Even in the era of DES, clinical results favored CABG. The difference in clinical results is due to the sustainability of successful revascularization.