Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention in coronary artery disease patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: A Chinese single-center study

Abstract

ObjectivesAims to compare the contemporary and long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).Methods823 CAD patients with advanced CKD (eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2) were collected, including 247 patients who underwent CABG and 576 patients received PCI from January 2014 to February 2021. The primary endpoint was all-cause death. The secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and revascularization.ResultsMultivariable Cox regression models were used and propensity score matching (PSM) was also performed. After PSM, the 30-day mortality rate in the CABG group was higher than that in the PCI group but without statistically significant (6.6% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.24). During the first year, patients referred for CABG had a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.42 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41–3.01] for mortality compared with PCI. At the end of the 5-year follow-up, CABG group had a HR of 0.58 (95%CI, 0.38–0.86) for repeat revascularization, a HR of 0.77 (95%CI, 0.52–1.14) for survival rate and a HR of 0.88(95%CI, 0.56–1.18) for MACCEs as compared to PCI.ConclusionsAmong patients with CAD and advanced CKD who underwent CABG or PCI, the all-cause mortality and MACCEs were comparable between the two groups in 30 days, 1-year and 5 years. However, CABG was only associated with a significantly lower risk for repeat revascularization compared with PCI at 5 years follow-up.