Appraising failure of surgical and percutaneous revascularization: long term outcomes from an observational registry.

AIM: Many randomized trials have compared coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in terms of efficacy, but data comparing outcomes of patients in which these two techniques have failed are lacking. METHODS: We included patients undergoing PCI at our center between July 2002 and December 2004. Subjects were distinguished in 2 groups: those with at least one occluded or stenotic saphenous vein graft (CABG failure), and those with at least one stent with angiographically documented restenosis (PCI failure). The primary endpoint was the long-term rate of major adverse clinical events. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirthy four patients were included, with a medium follow up of 61±13 months; 134 were assigned to the CABG failure group, and 104 to the PCI failure group, sharing high rates of baseline risk factors. At long term rates of death were higher in post CABG group (22.1% vs. 9.9%; P=0.015, RR 2.24 C.I. 95% 1.14-4.40) while death rates in patients with diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (24.0% vs. 23.5%; P=0.969, RR 1.020 C.I. 95% 0.38-2.74) were not different CONCLUSION: PCI can be safely offered to both these kinds of patients: as recently demonstrated post CABG outcomes seem to be more favorable in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Short and long term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug eluting stent and bare metal stent in patients with chronic kidney disease.

AIM: Coronary artery disease represents the most important cause of mortality and morbidity in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Despite continuous improvements in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), CKD is still associated with more adverse events after PCI. We performed a retrospective study to compare bare metal stents (BMS) versus drug eluting stents (DES) in CKD. METHODS: We included consecutively all patients undergoing PCI at our Centre from July 2002 to December 2005 with CKD, defined as creatinine clearance <60 mL/min. Patients who received only DES were compared to those who received only BMS. The primary end-point was the long-term rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, i.e. the composite of death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization). RESULTS: We included a total of 219 patients with CKD out of a total of 2354 patients, with 164 receiving BMS and 55 DES. After a mean follow up of 48 months, the MACE rate was significantly higher in BMS group (71% versus 38%, P<0.001). A similarly increased risk with BMS was found for death (45% versus 17%, P<0.001), whereas the rates for repeat coronary revascularization, myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were not significantly different. Multivariable analysis showed that BMS vs.. DES implantation was not statistically significant associated with MACE, death, myocardial infarction, rePTCA or stent thrombosis. CONCLUSION: Compared with BMS, use of DES in patients with CKD is safe and effective in reducing adverse outcomes. However, differences found between groups in clinical end-point could be ascribed to selection bias and confounding factors.