No abstract

ObjectivesWe aimed to analyse the short-term and long-term outcome of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing percutaneous intervention (PCI) as compared to coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) to evaluate the optimal coronary revascularisation strategy.DesignRetrospective analysis of routine statutory health insurance data between 2010 and 2012.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was adjusted all-cause mortality after 30 days and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events at 1 year. Secondary outcomes were repeat revascularisation at 30 days and 1 year and bleeding events within 7 days.ResultsThe total number of cases was n=4123 (PCI; n=3417), median age was 71 (IQR 62–77), 30.4% were women. The adjusted OR for death within 30 days was 0.59 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.81) for patients undergoing PCI versus CABG. At 1 year, the adjusted OR for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was 1.58 (1.32 to 1.89) for PCI versus CABG and 1.47 (1.23 to 1.75) for all-cause death. In the subgroup of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), adjusted all-cause mortality at 30 days did not differ significantly between both groups (OR 0.75 (0.47 to 1.20)), whereas in patients without AMI the OR for 30-day mortality was 0.44 (0.28 to 0.68) for PCI versus CABG. At 1 year, the adjusted OR for MACCE in patients with AMI was 1.40 (1.06 to 1.85) for PCI versus CABG and 1.47 (1.08 to 1.99) for mortality.ConclusionsIn this cohort of unselected patients with ESRD undergoing revascularisation, the 1-year outcome was better for CABG in patients with and without AMI. The 30-day mortality was higher in non-AMI patients with CABG reflecting an early hazard with surgery. In cases where the patient's characteristics and risk profile make it difficult to decide on a revascularisation strategy, CABG could be the preferred option.

This is the first cross-sectoral routine analysis of cardiac catheters and sequential events up to one year in Germany. The actual medical care situation revealed information particularly with regard to the second and follow-up inventions, which cannot be derived directly from medical guidelines. Beyond clinical trials, knowledge can be gained which is important both for medicine as well as the politics of health services.

No abstract

Since cost-benefit is a basic need in running a hospital today, financial resources should be enhanced in the spheres which are equally medically important for fulfilling the expectations of the patients. Therefore, the number of staff and the qualification of the medical professionals should be financed instead of supporting architectural and room design. Accordingly, the patients' main criteria for choosing a hospital is the medical equipment provided and the qualification of the medical staff. In conclusion, these aspects should be publicized for meaningful decision-making. Medical professionals should be encouraged to inspire competence and to spend as much time as possible with each individual patient.