Treating coronary heart disease in kidney failure patients

November 29, 2012

Among the two available procedures for opening blocked arteries surrounding the heart, one appears to be safer than the other for dialysis patients, according to a study appearing in an upcoming issue of the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (JASN). The findings may help lead to better care for kidney failure patients with coronary heart disease.

While 30% to 60% of kidney failure patients on dialysis have blocked arteries surrounding the heart, there is little information regarding how to optimally fix the life-threatening problem in these individuals. That's because dialysis patients have been excluded from clinical trials on the two available procedures: (, or CABG) and angioplasty (percutaneous coronary intervention, or PCI).

Tara Chang, MD, Wolfgang Winkelmayer, MD, ScD (Stanford University School of Medicine) and their colleagues examined a database of all patients on dialysis in the United States with primary to determine which is the best revascularization strategy: CABG or PCI. They identified nearly 22,000 who underwent CABG or PCI between 1997 and 2009.

Among the major findings:

  • Overall survival rates were poor, with five-year survival rates of 22% to 25% irrespective of revascularization strategy. (Five-year survival rates in patients without kidney disease are over 90%.)
  • CABG was associated with a 13% lower risk of death and a 12% lower risk of either dying or having a heart attack.
"It is important to note that because our study was observational, our results cannot prove that CABG is better; only a randomized trial can do that," said Dr. Chang. "However, our study does offer guidance to patients and providers who must make these tough decisions and suggests that in carefully selected patients on dialysis with multivessel , CABG may be preferred rather than PCI." Because organizing a randomized trial of CABG and PCI in patients on dialysis would be quite difficult, observational studies such as this one may be the best way to compare the two strategies.

Explore further: Increased stroke risk at 30-days post-CABG versus PCI

More information: The article, entitled "Multivessel Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ESRD," will appear online at on November 29, 2012.

Related Stories

Increased stroke risk at 30-days post-CABG versus PCI

August 21, 2012

(HealthDay) -- The risk of stroke at 30 days is significantly higher in patients who undergo coronary revascularization with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery compared to those who undergo percutaneous coronary ...

Recommended for you

Zika virus infection alters human and viral RNA

October 20, 2016

Researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine have discovered that Zika virus infection leads to modifications of both viral and human genetic material. These modifications—chemical tags known as ...

Food-poisoning bacteria may be behind Crohn's disease

October 19, 2016

People who retain a particular bacterium in their gut after a bout of food poisoning may be at an increased risk of developing Crohn's disease later in life, according to a new study led by researchers at McMaster University.

Neurodevelopmental model of Zika may provide rapid answers

October 19, 2016

A newly published study from researchers working in collaboration with the Regenerative Bioscience Center at the University of Georgia demonstrates fetal death and brain damage in early chick embryos similar to microcephaly—a ...

Scientists uncover new facets of Zika-related birth defects

October 17, 2016

In a study that could one day help eliminate the tragic birth defects caused by Zika virus, scientists from the Florida campus of The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) have elucidated how the virus attacks the brains of newborns, ...

Ebola drug ZMapp may help, but is not a miracle cure

October 13, 2016

ZMapp, once touted as a miraculous "secret serum" against the deadly Ebola virus, has shown some success but fell short of the bar for effectiveness in a clinical trial, researchers said Wednesday.


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.