AIMS: To systematically review literature comparing bare metal stent (BMS) to drug-eluting stent (DES) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis. ESRD patients on dialysis often suffer from accelerated atherosclerosis and higher rate of stent-related complications including major adverse cardiovascular events. Because dialysis usually qualifies ineligibility for randomized clinical trials, an evidenced-based stent choice for these patients is scarce. METHODS: PUBMED, CINHAL, COCHRANE, EMBASE and WEB OF SCIENCE were searched for studies comparing BMS vs. DES outcome in ESRD patients on dialysis. RESULTS: Twenty studies including 64 232 patients were considered. The use of DES was significantly associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89], death from a cardiovascular cause (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.84) and target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.00). No significant difference was found in stent thrombosis (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50-2.33) and myocardial infarction incidence (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis shows a significant reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with the use of DES over BMS in dialyzed patients. Despite the lack of randomized studies, systematic use of DES in these high-risk patients should thus reasonably be considered as a first option in percutaneous coronary intervention candidates.

Drug-eluting compared to bare metal stents in patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis: A meta-analysis

De Ferrari G. M.;
2019-01-01

Abstract

AIMS: To systematically review literature comparing bare metal stent (BMS) to drug-eluting stent (DES) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis. ESRD patients on dialysis often suffer from accelerated atherosclerosis and higher rate of stent-related complications including major adverse cardiovascular events. Because dialysis usually qualifies ineligibility for randomized clinical trials, an evidenced-based stent choice for these patients is scarce. METHODS: PUBMED, CINHAL, COCHRANE, EMBASE and WEB OF SCIENCE were searched for studies comparing BMS vs. DES outcome in ESRD patients on dialysis. RESULTS: Twenty studies including 64 232 patients were considered. The use of DES was significantly associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89], death from a cardiovascular cause (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.84) and target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.00). No significant difference was found in stent thrombosis (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50-2.33) and myocardial infarction incidence (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis shows a significant reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with the use of DES over BMS in dialyzed patients. Despite the lack of randomized studies, systematic use of DES in these high-risk patients should thus reasonably be considered as a first option in percutaneous coronary intervention candidates.
2019
20
5
313
320
http://journals.lww.com/jcardiovascularmedicine
Stents; DES; dialysis; renal failure; Aged; Female; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Ischemia; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Prosthesis Design; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Drug-Eluting Stents; Metals; Renal Dialysis; Stents
Galiffa V.A.; Crimi G.; Gritti V.; Scotti V.; Ferrario M.; Repetto A.; Ferlini M.; Marinoni B.; De Ferrari G.M.; De Servi S.; Bongo A.S.; Visconti L.O...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2019.20.313-320.Galiffa et al..pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 328.76 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
328.76 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1716840
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact