One-year clinical outcomes in patients with chronic renal failure treated by percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent

Summary Background It is unknown whether the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) apply in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF). Aims To compare DES with bare metal stents (BMS) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in CRF patients. Patients and methods Consecutive patients treated by PCI were allocated to four groups according to type of stent used (DES versus BMS) and creatinine clearance (CrCl). CRF was defined as CrCl less than 60 mL/minute. Cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiac events (MACE, defined as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke and target lesion revascularization [TLR]), TLR and definite stent thrombosis (ST) were recorded at 1 year. Results We note that 1376 consecutive patients underwent PCI with stent within 18 months: 534 (39%) and 492 (36%) patients without CRF and 224 (16%) and 126 (9%) patients with CRF were treated with BMS and DES, respectively. In the entire cohort, patients treated with DES had a higher restenosis risk profile. BMS were predominantly (87%) used for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. At 1 year, 6.2% had cardiovascular death, 15.8% MACE, 7.3% TLR and 1.5% ST. Cardiovascular death and MACE occurred less frequently in DES groups. The TLR rate was not significantly different in the CRF groups (BMS 9.8% vs DES 7.1%; P = 0.44). No excess of ST was observed in the DES groups and use of DES was independently associated with absence of MACE and TLR. Conclusions In patients with CRF, DES appear to be at least as effective as BMS — despite a higher restenosis risk profile — with no excess of ST at 1 year.