کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
2837079 | 1164886 | 2014 | 6 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
![عکس صفحه اول مقاله: Drug-eluting stents in patients on chronic hemodialysis: Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs. limus-eluting stents Drug-eluting stents in patients on chronic hemodialysis: Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs. limus-eluting stents](/preview/png/2837079.png)
BackgroundPatients 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).MethodsIn 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)].ResultsBaseline 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).ConclusionsPatients 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.
Journal: Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine - Volume 15, Issue 2, March 2014, Pages 86–91