Current hemodialysis patients show similar results for sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel

Original title: Drug-eluting stents in patients on chronic haemodialysis: Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs. limus –eluting stents Reference: Gabriel l. Sardi, et al. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2014 Mar;15(2):86-91.

End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) including renal failure on hemodialysis is associated with coronary heart disease and diabetes with subsequent need for revascularization that in this special population has a high rate of restenosis and mortality. In this study 218 patients with ESRD on HDA and CHD of which 156 received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or everolimus (EES) and 62 patients who received paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) were included. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction and revascularization at 2 years and the secondary end point was the target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years also. The average age of the population was 67 years and 71% were diabetic (39 % requiring insulin).

There was no difference in the primary end point at two years (PES 62.7 % versus SES/EES 58.3 %, p = 0.59). Numerically, both TLR and death were half in the PES group at one and two years but did not reach statistical significance (6.8 % versus 12.4 %, p = 0.24 and 11.1% versus 25.8 %, p = 0.06 respectively). A TLR analysis -adjusted by mortality rate, was performed, showing the benefit of PES disappears and diabetes was the only predictor of TLR at 2 years. The insulin requirement was not a TLR predictor. 

Conclusion

Hemodialysis patients have a high rate of target lesion revascularization despite the use of drug-eluting stents. The use of paclitaxel – eluting stents showed no significant advantage over releasing limus in this population.

Comment

This study shows that results of the PES and SES/EES in patients on HAD is similar (unlike previous studies that favored PES) even with a high rate of death and restenosis. Perhaps bio absorbable stents have a role in improving outcomes or decreased re-interventions. 

Courtesy Dr. Carlos Fava
Interventional cardiologist
Fundación Favaloro – Buenos Aires

Dr. Carlos Fava para SOLACI.ORG

More articles by this author

Esta es una entrada en ingles

demo en ingles

test eng

Download the Official SOLACI-CACI 2024 Congress APP

  DOWNLOAD THE OFFICIAL APP OF SOLACI-CACI 2024 Next Wednesday marks the beginning of SOLACI-CACI 2024! Download the Congress APP and discover the unmissable program of the...

Survey on Hemodynamics Centers in Latin America – SOLACI, Stent Save a Life! and South American Society of Cardiology Initiative

The treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in Latin America is highly diverse. There are notable differences between countries and even among regions...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

SMART-CHOICE 3 | Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel vs Aspirin Monotherapy in High Risk Patients after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Courtesy of Dr. Juan Manuel Pérez. After post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) standard duration dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), the optimal long term monotherapy strategy is...

RACE Trial: Effect of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty and Riociguat on Right Ventricular Afterload and Function in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension

Even though pulmonary endarterectomy is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), up to 40% of patients are not candidates because...

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...