Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2026

A Retrograde Implantation Approach for Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in Mice
Published on: July 20, 2022
Efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in hemodialysis patients
Michiaki Higashitani1, Fumiaki Mori, Norihiro Yamada
1Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-0022, Japan. mhigasit@hij.twmu.ac.jp
Insights
Paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) show improved outcomes for hemodialysis patients compared to sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). PES significantly reduced restenosis and target lesion revascularization rates in this high-risk group.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Interventional Cardiology
- Nephrology
Background:
- Hemodialysis patients are a high-risk group for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
- Sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) have shown limited efficacy in reducing restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in this population.
- Paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) are a potential alternative for improving outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) versus sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in reducing restenosis and TLR in hemodialysis patients.
- To investigate angiographic outcomes in hemodialysis patients treated with PES compared to SES.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study analyzing 54 hemodialysis patients (87 lesions) with PES and 49 patients (68 lesions) with SES.
- Angiographic follow-up obtained at 8-10 months for a subset of lesions in both groups.
- Baseline characteristics, including peripheral artery disease, were compared between groups.
Main Results:
- The PES group had a higher prevalence of peripheral artery disease at baseline.
- Binary restenosis rates were significantly lower in the PES group (13.6%) compared to the SES group (39.5%) (p=0.034).
- Target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates were also significantly lower in the PES group (9.3%) versus the SES group (26.5%) (p=0.041).
Conclusions:
- Paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) are more effective than sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in reducing restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in hemodialysis patients.
- PES may offer improved angiographic outcomes for this specific high-risk patient cohort.
Abstract:
Hemodialysis patients were recognized as a high-risk group for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of the bare-metal stent. Recently, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) have reduced restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR); however, it has been reported that their efficacy in hemodialysis patients is limited. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) improved angiographic outcomes of hemodialysis patients compared with SES. This study is a retrospective cohort study. We analyzed 54 hemodialysis patients with 87 lesions implanted with PES from February 2007 to September 2008, and 49 hemodialysis patients with 68 lesions implanted with SES from August 2004 to January 2007. Angiographic follow-up after 8-10 months was obtained for 59 lesions (67.8%) in the PES group and 43 lesions (63.2%) in the SES group. At baseline, the PES patients had more peripheral artery disease compared with the SES group (66.7 vs. 34.7%; p = 0.0012). There were no significant differences in the angiographic characteristics or procedural index. The binary restenosis rate was lower in lesions implanted with PES than in those with SES (13.6 vs. 39.5%; p = 0.034). Accordingly, the TLR rate was lower in lesions implanted with PES than with SES (9.3 vs. 26.5%; p = 0.041). Our results suggest that PES is more effective than SES in reducing restenosis and TLR in hemodialysis patients.
Related Concept Videos
Extracorporeal Removal of Drugs: Peritoneal Dialysis and Hemodialysis
Hemodialysis I: Introduction
Hemodialysis II: Procedure and Complications
Peritoneal Dialysis III: Nursing Management
Peritoneal Dialysis II: Peritoneal Dialysis Systems and Complications
Hemodialysis III: Nursing Management