Coronary Revascularization in Chronic and End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Myocardial revascularization in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes of two different revascularization strategies in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients: coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

We conducted this meta-analysis according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021238659), evaluated studies comparing CABG and PCI in patients with CAD and CKD (defined by KDIGO guidelines). Data were extracted from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane from 2000 to 2023. The primary end-point was long-term major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event rates, with secondary end-points including 30-day mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) and repeat revascularization. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier estimations, Cox regression, and meta-regression to address heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plots. No funding was received, and the authors report no conflicts of interest.

RESULTS

We included 33 studies with 402 300 patients (eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2). The cohort comprised 132 314 coronary artery bypass graft and 269 986 PCI patients. Over 3 years, coronary artery bypass group provided protection against major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, MI, and repeat revascularization compared to PCI. However, PCI showed better short-term outcomes, including lower 30-day mortality. Coronary artery bypass group was linked to a higher stroke risk over the 3-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Revascularization strategies for CKD and coronary artery disease patients should balance PCI's short-term benefits with CABG's long-term advantages.

Benefits and Harms of Coronary Revascularization in Non-Dialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease and Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Key Points

In people with non–dialysis-dependent CKD, revascularization may lower all-cause mortality and risk of cardiovascular events. Adverse kidney events, which are often cited as a reason to avoid revascularization, were uncommon. Additional research on the effect of revascularization on patient-reported outcomes in people with non–dialysis-dependent CKD is needed.

Background

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in people with CKD. Coronary revascularization can improve cardiac function and prognosis in people with ischemic heart disease; however, in people with CKD, there is concern that potential harms could outweigh benefits of revascularization. Evidence on the balance of these risks and benefits, specifically in people with non–dialysis-dependent CKD, is lacking.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess the risks and benefits of revascularization, compared with medical management, among adults or children with ischemic heart disease and CKD not requiring KRT (dialysis or transplantation). We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 12, 2023. Two people independently screened titles and abstracts followed by full-text review, serially extracted data using standardized forms, independently assessed risk of bias, and graded the certainty of evidence (COE).

Results

Evaluating data from nine randomized controlled trials, we found that people with CKD and ischemic heart disease treated with revascularization may experience lower all-cause mortality compared with people receiving medical management (risk ratio [RR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.98; COE, low). Revascularization may reduce incidence of myocardial infarction (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.04; COE, low) and heart failure (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.23; COE, low). The effect on cardiovascular mortality is uncertain (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.20; COE, very low). Evidence was insufficient for patient-reported outcomes and adverse kidney events. Data were limited by heterogeneity of patient populations and the limited number of trials.

Conclusions

In people with non–dialysis-dependent CKD, revascularization may be associated with lower all-cause mortality compared with medical management and may also lower the risk of cardiovascular events. Additional data surrounding kidney and patient-reported outcomes are needed to comprehensively engage in shared decision making and determine optimal treatment strategies for people with CKD and ischemic heart disease.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number:

CRD42022349820 (PROSPERO).

In-hospital outcomes of PCI in patients who have ESRD vs non-ESRD patients, a retrospective study involving a National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). ESRD is known to affect a large portion of the American population. Previous data for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of ESRD for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and non-ACS etiologies have shown to have an increase in in-hospital mortality, and prolonged hospitalization among other complications.

METHODS

The national inpatient sample (NIS) was used to identify patients who underwent PCI between the years 2016-2019. Patients were then grouped into those with ESRD on renal replacement therapy (RRT). Logistic regression models were employed to assess the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality, while linear regression models were utilized to evaluate secondary outcomes, including hospitalization cost and length of stay.

RESULTS

A total of 21,366 unweighted observations were initially included, consisting of 50 % ESRD patients and 50 % randomly selected patients without ESRD who underwent PCI. These observations were weighted to represent a national estimate of 106,830 patients. The mean age of the study population was 65 years, and 63 % of the patients were male. The ESRD group had a greater representation of minority groups compared to the control group. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the ESRD group compared to the control group, with an odds ratio of 1.803 (95 % CI: 1.502 to 2.164; p-value of 0.0002). Additionally, the ESRD group had significantly higher healthcare costs and longer length of stay, with a mean difference of $47,618 (95 % CI: $42,701 to $52,534, p-value <0.0001) and 2.933 days (95 % CI, 2.729 to 3.138 days, p-value <0.0001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality, cost, and length of stay for patients undergoing PCI were found to be significantly greater in the ESRD group.

Surgical versus interventional coronary revascularization in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To study the most beneficial coronary revascularization strategy in kidney transplant recipients (KTR).

METHODS

In 16th June 2022 and updated on 26th February 2023, we searched in five databases including PubMed for relevant articles. The odds ratio (OR) together with the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were used to report the results.

RESULTS

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was significantly associated with significant lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.62; 95%CI 0.51-0.75) and 1-year mortality (OR 0.81; 95%CI 0.68-0.97), but not overall mortality (mortality at the last follow-up point) (OR 1.05; 95%CI 0.93-1.18) rather than coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Moreover, PCI was significantly associated with lower acute kidney injury prevalence (OR 0.33; 95%CI 0.13-0.84) compared to CABG. One study indicated that non-fatal graft failure prevalence did not differ between the PCI and the CABG group until 3 years of follow up. Moreover, one study demonstrated a short hospital length of stay in the PCI group rather than the CABG group.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence indicated the superiority of PCI than CABG as a coronary revascularization procedure in short- but not long-term outcomes in KTR. We recommend further randomized clinical trials for demonstrating the best therapeutic modality for coronary revascularization in KTR.

Coronary revascularisation in patients with chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for revascularising coronary arteries in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). CKD is described as a continuous decrease in the glomerular filtration rate or abnormalities in kidney structure or function.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were searched for studies on the revascularisation of coronary arteries in patients with CKD and ESRD.

RESULTS

Since no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have addressed this issue so far, 31 observational studies involving 74 805 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with PCI, patients undergoing CABG have significantly higher early mortality (CKD: RR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.17-2.25, pheterogeneity = 0.476, I²  = 0; ESRD: RR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.46-2.71, pheterogeneity = 0.001, I²  = 66.9%). Patients with ESRD undergoing CABG have significantly lower all-cause mortality (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93-0.96, pheterogeneity < 0.001, I²  = 82.9%) and cardiac mortality (RR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.92, pheterogeneity = 0.908, I²  = 0). The long-term risk of repeat revascularisation (CKD: RR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.19-0.30, pheterogeneity = 0.489, I²  = 0; ESRD: RR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.15-0.34, pheterogeneity = 0.012, I²  = 54.4%) and myocardial infarction (CKD: RR = .57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.85, pheterogeneity = 0.025, I²  = 49.9%; ESRD: RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.40-0.44, pheterogeneity = 0.49, I²  = 0) remained significantly higher in the PCI group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ESRD, but not CKD, who underwent CABG had significantly lower all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality. However, CABG was associated with an increased risk of early mortality in patients with CKD or ESRD. Adequately powered, contemporary, prospective RCTs are needed to define the optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with CKD and ESRD.

Comparative analysis of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery for patients with end-stage renal disease: a nationwide inpatient sample database

BACKGROUND

The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and concomitant end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains unknown.

RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) (2002-2017) was queried to identify all cases of CAD and ESRD. The relative merits of PCI vs CABG were determined using a propensity-matched multivariate logistic regression model. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality and other in-hospital complications were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 350,623 [CABG = 112,099 (32%) and PCI = 238,524 (68%)] hospitalizations were included in the analysis. The overall adjusted odds for major bleeding (aOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.25-1.31, P < 0.0001), post-procedure bleeding (aOR 5.19, 95% CI 4.93-5.47, P < 0.0001), sepsis (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.26-1.33, P < 0.0001), cardiogenic shock (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.26, P < 0.0001), and in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.61-1.69, P < 0.0001) were significantly higher for patients undergoing CABG compared with PCI. The need for intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) placement (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 2.45-2.59, P < 0.001) was higher in the CABG group, while the adjusted odds of vascular complications were similar between the two groups (aOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.06, P = 0.82). As expected, patients undergoing CABG had a higher mean length of stay and mean cost of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

CABG in ESRD may be associated with higher in-hospital complications, increased length of stay, and higher resource utilization.

Comparison of coronary artery bypass graft versus drug-eluting stents in dialysis patients: an updated systemic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

As percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technologies have been far improved, we hence conducted an updated systemic review and meta-analysis to determine the comparability between coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and PCI with drug-eluting stent (DES) in ESRD patients.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED and the Cochrane from inception to January 2020. Included studies were published observational studies that compared the risk of cardiovascular outcomes among dialysis patients with CABG and DES. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird to calculate risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this analysis, involving total 56 422 (CABG 21 740 and PCI 34 682). Compared with DES, our study demonstrated CABG had higher 30-day mortality [odds ratio (OR) 3.85, P = 0.009] but lower cardiac mortality (OR 0.78, P < 0.001), myocardial infarction (OR 0.5, P < 0.001) and repeat revascularization (OR 0.35, P < 0.001). No statistical differences were found between CABG and DES for long-term mortality (OR 0.92, P = 0.055), composite outcomes (OR 0.88, P = 0.112) and stroke (OR 1.49, P = 0.457). Meta-regression suggested diabetes and the presence of left main coronary artery disease as an effect modifier of long-term mortality.

CONCLUSION

PCI with DES shared similar long-term mortality, composite outcomes and stroke outcomes to CABG among dialysis patients but still was associated with an improved 30-day survival. However, CABG had better rates of myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization and cardiac mortality.

Influence of chronic kidney disease on early clinical outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

Background

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a high incidence of coronary heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in these patients. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) significantly increases short-term mortality and decreases long-term mortality in patients with CKD compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The effect of CKD on the early outcomes of off-pump CABG is not well-studied. We aimed to investigate the effect of CKD on early postoperative mortality and complications following off-pump CABG.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed preoperative baseline and surgery data for 1173 patients undergoing off-pump CABG from January 2010 to December 2017 in the Department of Cardiac Surgery, Peking University First Hospital. Outpatient follow-up was performed until 30 days postoperatively. Patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates calculated according to the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation of ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m² were assigned to the normal renal function group (normal group, n = 924), and those with a rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² were assigned to the CKD group (CKD group, n = 249).

Results

Patients in the CKD group were seriously ill with multiple complications, and postoperative 30-day mortality and complication rates were significantly higher than those in the normal group. In the logistic regression analysis, after correcting for common confounding factors, namely sex, age, and left ventricular ejection fraction, preoperative CKD was a risk factor for postoperative acute kidney injury, perioperative myocardial infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding, secondary tracheal intubation, stroke, chest wound infection, prolonged mechanical ventilation (≥ 24 h), prolonged intensive care unit stay (≥ 72 h), prolonged length of stay (≥ 14 d), dialysis requirement, and postoperative death within 30 days.

Conclusions

Patients with CKD had more preoperative complications, and their postoperative 30-day mortality and complication rates after off-pump CABG were significantly higher than those of patients with normal renal function. For CABG patients with CKD, the risk of surgery should be assessed carefully, and comprehensive measures should be taken to strengthen perioperative management, with an aim to reduce complications and mortality and improve surgical outcomes.

Renal insufficiency and severe coronary artery disease: should coronary artery bypass grafting, off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention be performed?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an important determinant of long-term survival. However, the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with CKD is still controversial. Herein we review the impact of different treatment modalities on the outcomes of patients with CKD.

RECENT FINDINGS

CABG could confer better long-term outcomes than PCI in patients with CKD, irrespective of CKD severity. CABG as compared with PCI may be associated with improved long-term survival albeit higher short-term risk. Off-pump as compared with on-pump CABG may be associated with better short-term outcomes but no demonstrable long-term benefit. In CKD patients who are treated with PCI, the use of drug-eluting stents may be associated with better intermediate-term outcomes than bare metal stents.

SUMMARY

There is insufficient evidence to inform the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with CKD and severe coronary artery disease. CABG as compared with PCI confers greater long-term benefit but higher upfront risk. A multidisciplinary, team-based evaluation based on individual patient comorbidity, frailty and anatomical disease burden, is recommended when making treatment decisions.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft in Acute Coronary Syndrome patients with Renal Dysfunction

ACS patients with renal dysfunction tend to have a poorer prognosis than those with normal renal function. This retrospective cohort study was performed using The Second Drug-Eluting Stent Impact on Revascularization Registry, a retrospective registry, to evaluate the time-dependent relative risk of revascularization strategies in ACS patients with renal dysfunction. The study demonstrated that the short-term MACCE rate was lower after PCI than CABG. However, there was no significant difference in long-term MACCE rate. Subgroup analyses based on the degree of renal dysfunction resulted in similar findings. The revascularization strategy was identified as a time-dependent covariate by the time-dependent Cox model, and the regression coefficient was ‘−1.124 + 0.344 × ln (time + 1)’. For the entire object group and the separate subgroups, PCI was initially associated with a lower hazard for MACCE than CABG after revascularization, then the hazard ratio increases with time. In conclusion, the hazard ratio for MACCE in PCI relative to CABG is time-dependent. PCI tends to have a lower risk for MACCE than CABG in the short-term, then the hazard ratio increases with time.

Revascularisation of patients with end-stage renal disease on chronic haemodialysis: bypass surgery versus PCI-analysis of routine statutory health insurance data

Objectives

We aimed to analyse the short-term and long-term outcome of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing percutaneous intervention (PCI) as compared to coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) to evaluate the optimal coronary revascularisation strategy.

Design

Retrospective analysis of routine statutory health insurance data between 2010 and 2012.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcome was adjusted all-cause mortality after 30 days and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events at 1 year. Secondary outcomes were repeat revascularisation at 30 days and 1 year and bleeding events within 7 days.

Results

The total number of cases was n=4123 (PCI; n=3417), median age was 71 (IQR 62–77), 30.4% were women. The adjusted OR for death within 30 days was 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.81) for patients undergoing PCI versus CABG. At 1 year, the adjusted OR for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was 1.58 (1.32 to 1.89) for PCI versus CABG and 1.47 (1.23 to 1.75) for all-cause death. In the subgroup of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), adjusted all-cause mortality at 30 days did not differ significantly between both groups (OR 0.75 (0.47 to 1.20)), whereas in patients without AMI the OR for 30-day mortality was 0.44 (0.28 to 0.68) for PCI versus CABG. At 1 year, the adjusted OR for MACCE in patients with AMI was 1.40 (1.06 to 1.85) for PCI versus CABG and 1.47 (1.08 to 1.99) for mortality.

Conclusions

In this cohort of unselected patients with ESRD undergoing revascularisation, the 1-year outcome was better for CABG in patients with and without AMI. The 30-day mortality was higher in non-AMI patients with CABG reflecting an early hazard with surgery. In cases where the patient's characteristics and risk profile make it difficult to decide on a revascularisation strategy, CABG could be the preferred option.