4.7 Article

Multivessel Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ESRD

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
卷 23, 期 12, 页码 2042-2049

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2012060554

关键词

-

资金

  1. American Heart Association [0875162N, 12SDG11670032]
  2. National Institutes of Health [1R21DK089368, 1R21DK077336, 1R01DK090181, 1R01AR057327, 1R01DK090008, 1R01DK095024]
  3. [HHSAA2900200500401]
  4. [HHSN268201100003C]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据