Simplified Rapid Hydration Prevents Contrast-Associated Acute Kidney Injury Among CKD Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) are at high risk of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) and mortality. Therefore, there is a clinical need to explore safe, convenient, and effective strategies for preventing CA-AKI. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess whether simplified rapid hydration is noninferior to standard hydration for CA-AKI prevention in patients with CKD. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled study was conducted across 21 teaching hospitals and included 1,002 patients with CKD. Patients were randomized to either simplified hydration (SH) (SH group, with normal saline from 1 hour before to 4 hours after CAG at a rate of 3 mL/kg/h) or standard hydration (control group, with normal saline 12 hours before and 12 hours after CAG at a rate of 1 mL/kg/h). The primary endpoint of CA-AKI was a ≥25% or 0.5-mg/dL rise in serum creatinine from baseline within 48 to 72 hours. RESULTS: CA-AKI occurred in 29 of 466 (6.2%) patients in the SH group and in 38 of 455 (8.4%) patients in the control group (relative risk: 0.8; 95% CI: 0.5-1.2; P = 0.216). In addition, the risk of acute heart failure and 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between the groups. However, the median hydration duration was significantly shorter in the SH group than in the control group (6 vs 25 hours; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In CKD patients undergoing CAG, SH is noninferior to standard hydration in preventing CA-AKI with a shorter hydration duration.

Aspirin Versus Clopidogrel Monotherapy for the Treatment of Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Although aspirin (ASA) is the mainstay of treatment for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke, the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events (CAPRIE) trial showed ASA monotherapy to be inferior to clopidogrel in preventing recurrent adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high cardiac risks. Here, we aimed to systematically compare ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Electronic databases were searched and studies were included if they compared ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with CAD and they reported adverse clinical outcomes. The latest version of RevMan software (version 5.3) was used as the statistical tool for the data analysis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated to interpret the data. RESULTS: A total number of 5497 patients (from years 2003 to 2011) were treated with ASA monotherapy, whereas 2544 patients were treated with clopidogrel monotherapy. Results of this analysis showed no significant difference in composite endpoints (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47-2.10; P = 0.98), all-cause mortality (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.82-1.33; P = 0.71), cardiac death (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.17-4.74; P = 0.89, myocardial infarction (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52-1.36; P = 0.48), stroke (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.39-4.06; P = 0.70), and bleeding defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC [grade 3 or above]) (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78-2.12; P = 0.33). CONCLUSION: This analysis did not show any significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and BARC grade 3 or above among CAD patients who were treated with either ASA or clopidogrel monotherapy. However, as a result of the limited data, this hypothesis should be confirmed in other major trials.

Early and Late Stent Thrombosis in Patients with Versus Without Diabetes Mellitus Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Drug-Eluting Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, drug-eluting stents (DES) are most commonly used compared with bare metal stents (BMS) since the former are associated with significantly lower rates of revascularization following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, unpredictable in-stent thrombosis is a major concern with DES, especially in patients with diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare early and late stent thrombosis in patients with versus without diabetes mellitus following PCI with DES. METHODS: Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials or observational studies comparing patients with diabetes mellitus versus those without it following PCI with DES and they reported acute and sub-acute/early and late stent thrombosis among their clinical outcomes. Early stent thrombosis was defined as stent thrombosis that occurred before 30 days and late stent thrombosis was defined as stent thrombosis that occurred after 30 days following PCI. The statistical analysis was carried out by the new version of the RevMan software (version 5.3), and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were considered as the statistical parameters. RESULTS: A total number of 18,910 patients were included in this analysis comparing early and late stent thrombosis in patients with diabetes mellitus (5123 patients) and in patients without diabetes mellitus (13,787 patients). Both groups of patients had similar rates of early stent thrombosis, with an OR of 1.30 (95% CI 0.89-1.91; P = 0.18, I2 = 9%) (4962 patients with diabetes mellitus were compared with 13,392 patients without diabetes mellitus). However, late stent thrombosis was significantly higher in patients with diabetes mellitus, with an OR of 1.95 (95% CI 1.35- 2.81; P = 0.0004, I2 = 0%) (5113 patients with diabetes mellitus and 13,775 patients without diabetes mellitus were compared). CONCLUSIONS: Both patients with and without diabetes mellitus had a similar rate of early stent thrombosis following PCI with DES. However, diabetes mellitus was associated with a significantly higher rate of late stent thrombosis.

Major adverse cardiac events and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease following percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to systematically compare Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACEs) and mortality following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in patients with and without Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD) through a meta-analysis. METHODS: Electronic databases (Cochrane library, EMBASE and Medline/PubMed) were searched for English publications comparing in-hospital and long-term MACEs and mortality following PCI in patients with a past medical history of COPD. Statistical analysis was carried out by Revman 5.3 whereby Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were considered the relevant parameters. RESULTS: A total number of 72,969 patients were included (7518 patients with COPD and 65,451 patients without COPD). Results of this analysis showed that in-hospital MACEs were significantly higher in the COPD group with OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.19-1.65; P = 0.0001, I2 = 0%. Long-term MACEs were still significantly higher in the COPD group with OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.38-1.81; P = 0.00001, I2 = 29%. Similarly, in-hospital and long-term mortality were significantly higher in patients with COPD, with OR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.78-2.85; P = 0.00001, I2 = 0% and OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.33-3.71; P = 0.002, I2 = 97% respectively. However, the result for the long-term death was highly heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: Since in-hospital and long-term MACEs and mortality were significantly higher following PCI in patients with versus without COPD, COPD should be considered a risk factor for the development of adverse clinical outcomes following PCI. However, the result for the long-term mortality was highly heterogeneous warranting further analysis.