{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04949874686716792, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03759398496240601, 'mean_word_length': 5.118773946360153, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Drug-eluting compared to bare metal stents in patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis: a meta-analysis

Aims To systematically review literature comparing bare metal stent (BMS) to drug-eluting stent (DES) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis. ESRD patients on dialysis often suffer from accelerated atherosclerosis and higher rate of stent-related complications including major adverse cardiovascular events. Because dialysis usually qualifies ineligibility for randomized clinical trials, an evidenced-based stent choice for these patients is scarce. Methods PUBMED, CINHAL, COCHRANE, EMBASE and WEB OF SCIENCE were searched for studies comparing BMS vs. DES outcome in ESRD patients on dialysis. Results Twenty studies including 64 232 patients were considered. The use of DES was significantly associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76–0.89], death from a cardiovascular cause (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76–0.84) and target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53–1.00). No significant difference was found in stent thrombosis (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50–2.33) and myocardial infarction incidence (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69–1.20). Conclusions Our meta-analysis shows a significant reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with the use of DES over BMS in dialyzed patients. Despite the lack of randomized studies, systematic use of DES in these high-risk patients should thus reasonably be considered as a first option in percutaneous coronary intervention candidates.