Key result
Coronary revascularization prior to renal transplantation showed no significant difference in cardiovascular outcomes compared to medical management (OR 1.415; 95% CI 0.885-2.263; p=0.147).
Why the study?
Does coronary revascularization improve posttransplantation CVD outcomes compared to medical management in patients with end-stage renal disease and significant obstructive coronary artery disease awaiting renal transplantation?
Meta-Analysis (n=598)
Does coronary revascularization improve posttransplantation CVD outcomes compared to medical management in patients with end-stage renal disease and significant obstructive coronary artery disease awaiting renal transplantation?
In patients with end-stage renal disease and obstructive CAD awaiting renal transplantation, pre-transplant coronary revascularization does not significantly improve post-transplant CVD outcomes compared to optimal medical therapy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Pre-transplant revascularization confers no cardiovascular benefit over medical therapy; challenges routine use and supports selective strategies in future trials.
Introduction: End-stage renal disease requiring renal transplantation comprises a growing patient population at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality in large part due to accelerated atherosclerosis. Consequently, these patients are at even higher risk of major surgical CVD mortality. A paucity of research has addressed the posttransplantation CVD outcomes related to different treatment strategies in this patient population and therefore, there are no specific preoperative guidelines regarding management of coronary artery disease in this high-risk population undergoing renal transplantation. Objective: Through meta-analysis we compare coronary revascularization to medical management prior to renal transplantation in patients who are found to have significant obstructive coronary artery disease. Results: A total of 6 studies were deemed suitable out of 777 articles reviewed. This included 260 patients who received medical management and 338 who received coronary revascularization. There were 36 events in the revascularization and 57 events in the medical management group. One study only reported hazard ratios but no CVD outcomes. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software was used to calculate pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the fixed effects. The data is presented as forest plots. The pooled odds ratio with 95% CI for the fixed effects was 1.415 (95% CI 0.885–2.263), p = 0.147, indicating that there is no difference in CVD outcomes between pretransplant treatment strategy. This observation suggests that the CVD outcomes posttransplantation are not affected when optimal medical therapy is used instead of coronary revascularization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kamran et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis in End-stage renal disease with significant obstructive coronary artery disease prior to renal transplantation (n=598). Coronary revascularization vs. Medical management was evaluated on Cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes (OR 1.415, 95% CI 0.885-2.263, p=0.147). Coronary revascularization prior to renal transplantation showed no significant difference in cardiovascular outcomes compared to medical management (OR 1.415; 95% CI 0.885-2.263; p=0.147).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: