Background: The present meta-analysis of propensity score-matching studies aimed to compare the long-term survival outcomes and adverse events associated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).
Methods: Electronic databases were searched for studies comparing CABG and PCI in patients with CKD. The search period extended to 13 February 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction, revascularization, and stroke. Odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express the pooled effect. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.
Results: Thirteen studies involving 18,005 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Long-term mortality risk was significantly lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70-0.83, p < .001), and similar results were observed in the subgroup analysis of patients undergoing dialysis and for different estimated glomerular filtration rate ranges. The incidence rates of myocardial infarction (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.54, p < .001) and revascularization (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.08-0.35, p < .001) were lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group, although there were no significant differences in the incidence of stroke between the two groups (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.89-1.73, p > .05). Subgroup analysis among patients on dialysis yielded similar results.
Conclusions: Our propensity score matching analysis revealed that, based on long-term follow-up outcomes, CABG remains superior to PCI in patients with CKD.
Keywords: Chronic kidney disease; coronary artery bypass surgery; percutaneous coronary intervention; propensity score matching.