Coronary disease & ACSSecondary analysis
Health Status after Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary and Advanced Kidney Disease
- Secondary analysis of the ISCHEMIA-CKD randomised trial
- Bayesian analysis
Authors' conclusion
Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy.
Study context
- Population
- Stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia and advanced CKD (eGFR <30 ml per minute per 1.73 m² or dialysis)705 assessed
- Participants
- 777 participants
- Comparison
- Invasive vs conservative strategy
- Primary endpoint
- SAQ Summary score (0–100, higher = less angina, better function and quality of life)
- Follow-up
- 3 months
Primary result
SAQ Summary score
Mean difference
2.1 points
95% CrI −0.4 to 4.6
Invasive vs Conservative
mean difference 2.1 points (95% CrI −0.4 to 4.6)
As reported in the abstract
Secondary outcomes
Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) Summary score difference by baseline angina frequency (subgroup) · 3 months
- Daily or weekly angina at baseline: mean difference 10.1 points
- 95% CrI 0.0 to 19.9
- Monthly angina at baseline: mean difference 2.2 points
- 95% CrI −2.0 to 6.2
- No angina at baseline: mean difference 0.6 points
- 95% CrI −1.9 to 3.3
SAQ Summary score, overall trial population · 6 months
- Between-group difference attenuated: 0.5 points
- 95% CrI −2.2 to 3.4
Original publication
Health Status after Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary and Advanced Kidney Disease. N Engl J Med. Published 30 March 2020. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1916374
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it