Percutaneous coronary intervention and the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis: A single center experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients on dialysis constitute a major healthcare burden with high prevalence of coronary artery disease frequently requiring coronary revascularization. Prior studies have reported high complications rates with revascularization in patients on dialysis. However, information on the use glycoprotein and direct thrombin inhibitors in this patient population undergoing percutaneous revascularization is limited. We retrospectively analyzed the procedural success and in-hospital outcomes of percutaneous coronary revascularization in 56 consecutive patients on dialysis compared with 524 patients without renal failure, between January 2001 and August 2007 at our facility. Additionally, we also analyzed the off-label use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GP IIb/IIIa) inhibitors during revascularization in this high-risk group of patients to evaluate for possible increased bleeding complications. In the study group, 7 interventions were performed on peritoneal dialysis and 49 on hemodialysis patients. Sixty-one percent of these patients had diabetes mellitus. A total of 72 lesions were intervened upon; 12 underwent angioplasty and 60 underwent stenting. Four of 72 interventions were not successful, giving a procedural success rate of 94%. There were 6 immediate complications (10.7%), but no deaths. Thirty-two patients (57%) received GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors while direct thrombin inhibitors were used during percutaneous coronary intervention in 11(20%) patients. There were no bleeding complications with use of either GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors or direct thrombin inhibitors. In our experience, percutaneous coronary intervention has high procedural success in dialysis patients and concomitant use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors is not associated with any major bleeding complications, making this a feasible, safe and effective revascularization option for patients on dialysis; however, this merits further study in a randomized prospective trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".