Hemmelgarn BR, Southern D, Culleton BF, Mitchell LB, Knudtson ML, Ghali WA for the APPROACH Investigators. Survival after coronary revascularization among patients with kidney disease. Circulation. 2004 Oct5;110:1890-95.
Background: The optimal approach to revascularization in patients with kidney disease has not been determined. We studied survival by treatment group (CABG, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or no revascularization) for patients with 3 categories of kidney function: dialysis-dependent kidney disease, non–dialysis-dependent kidney disease, and a reference group (serum creatinine _2.3 mg/dL).
Methods and Results: Data were derived from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcomes Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH), which captures information on all patients undergoing cardiac catheterization in Alberta , Canada. Characteristics and patient survival in 662 dialysis patients (1.6%) and 750 non–dialysis-dependent kidney disease patients (1.8%) were compared with the remainder of the 40 374 patients (96.6%). For the reference group, the adjusted 8-year survival rates for CABG, PCI, and no revascularization (NR) were 85.5%, 80.4%, and 72.3%,respectively (P_0.001 for CABG versus NR; P_0.001 for PCI versus NR). Adjusted survival rates were 45.9% for CABG, 32.7% for PCI, and 29.7% for NR in the non dialysis kidney disease group (P_0.001 for CABG versus NR;P_0.48 for PCI versus NR) and 44.8% for CABG, 41.2% for PCI, and 30.4% for NR in the dialysis group (P_0.003for CABG versus NR; P_0.03 for PCI versus NR).
Conclusions: Compared with no revascularization, CABG was associated with better survival in all categories of kidney function. PCI was also associated with a lower risk of death than no revascularization in reference patients and dialysis-dependent kidney disease patients but not in patients with non–dialysis-dependent kidney disease. The presence of kidney disease or dependence on dialysis should not be a deterrent to revascularization, particularly with CABG.