Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Comparative analysis of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery for patients with end-stage renal disease: a nationwide inpatient sample database.

Ullah W, Ur Rahman M, Rauf A, Zahid S, Thalambedu N, Mir T, Khan MZ, Fischman DL, Virani S, Alam M. Comparative analysis of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery for patients with end-stage renal disease: a nationwide inpatient sample database. Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy. 2021 Aug 1; 19(8):763-768.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions



Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and concomitant end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains unknown. RESEARCH DESIGN and METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) (2002-2017) was queried to identify all cases of CAD and ESRD. The relative merits of PCI vs CABG were determined using a propensity-matched multivariate logistic regression model. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality and other in-hospital complications were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 350,623 [CABG = 112,099 (32%) and PCI = 238,524 (68%)] hospitalizations were included in the analysis. The overall adjusted odds for major bleeding (aOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.25-1.31, P < 0.0001), post-procedure bleeding (aOR 5.19, 95% CI 4.93-5.47, P < 0.0001), sepsis (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.26-1.33, P < 0.0001), cardiogenic shock (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.26, P < 0.0001), and in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.61-1.69, P < 0.0001) were significantly higher for patients undergoing CABG compared with PCI. The need for intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) placement (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 2.45-2.59, P < 0.001) was higher in the CABG group, while the adjusted odds of vascular complications were similar between the two groups (aOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.06, P = 0.82). As expected, patients undergoing CABG had a higher mean length of stay and mean cost of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: CABG in ESRD may be associated with higher in-hospital complications, increased length of stay, and higher resource utilization.





Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.