Abstract

Background and Objective: Coronary heart diseases are being treated by surgical and non-surgical procedures like Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). The impact of these techniques on the patients with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) is a debatable issue. The risk factors (mortality and morbidity) associated with the application of these methods in CKD patients are brought to light in this study. Methods: The study was carried out at Services Hospital, Lahore from Jan 2016 to Aug 2017. A total of 159 CKD patients were selected from the revascularization center of the hospital. They had to undergo either from CABG or PCI. The main results after the treatment were loss of life, Myocardial Infarction (MI) heart attack, or stroke. We analyzed the mode of coronary revascularization having least risk factors of medical results. Results: Among 159 patients with CKD, 85 patients (53.5%) received PCI and 74 patients (46.5%) received CABG. The study revealed that patient with higher intensity of kidney disease were given PCI treatment and surgical procedure (CABG) was adopted in case of patients with mild CKD. However, the medical findings were not much different in both cases. The PCI method was preferred on the basis of factors like patients’ age, heart attack by complete blockage of artery (STEMI), heart attack by partial blockage (NSTEMI) and number of coronary arteries in patients with intense renal problems. Conclusion: The medical results seen in both cases were comparable for CKD patients. No significant difference was noticed in the patients for both methods. Therefore, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention can be agreeable and least intrusive treatment with respect to CABG, especially among patients with higher risks of kidney disease. Key Words: Chronic kidney disease, Creatinine clearance, Coronary revascularization, percutaneous coronary intervention, Coronary artery bypass graft.

Authors and Affiliations