Introduction This study evaluated the clinical characteristics of the acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients and established prognostic values of the biomarkers and echocardiography the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is comparable with the risk of CAD in patients with traditional risk factors. The association of the classic cardiovascular risk factor and the specific uraemia-related risk factors accelerates the atherosclerosis Materials and Methods This prospective study included 140 ACS patients admitted Department of General Medicine, JIIU’s Indian Institute of Medical Science and Research over a period of 1 year. Data were collected on demographics, clinical history, diagnostics and therapeutic interventions, with rigorous ethical considerations and informed consent. Statistical analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics to explore the clinical and therapeutic characteristics of ACS in patients with CKD. Results Demographics Mean age 65.4 ± 10.8 years, 60% male. CKD stages: Stage 3 (40%), Stage 4 (35%), Stage 5 (25%). Risk Factors Hypertension (80%), diabetes (62%), dyslipidemia (68%), smoking (28%). ACS Types STEMI (38%), NSTEMI (47%), Unstable Angina (15%). Management PCI (48%), CABG (12%), antiplatelets (90%), statins (85%). Outcomes In-hospital mortality (8%), MACE at 30 days (15%), renal function decline (18%). Laboratory Findings Mean eGFR 32.4 ± 8.7 mL/min/1.73m²; hyperkalemia in 20%, LDL-C 120 ± 28 mg/dL. Adverse Events Heart failure (22%), dialysis initiation (10%), major bleeding (12%).CKD Stage Trends PCI use decreased with CKD severity (Stage 3: 57%, Stage 5: 37%). 6-Month Follow-Up Mortality (18%), ACS readmission (12%), ESRD progression (15%). Key Insight CKD patients with ACS have worse outcomes, necessitating tailored management strategies Conclusion CKD significantly complicates the management and prognosis of ACS. Despite advances in cardiovascular care, CKD patients remain at a disproportionately high risk for adverse events. There is a critical need for tailored interventions, robust risk stratification tools, and multidisciplinary collaboration to improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.
The risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is comparable with the risk of CAD in patients with traditional risk factors. The association of the classic cardiovascular risk factor and the specific uraemia-related risk factors accelerates the atherosclerosis process, explaining the increased incidence of the major adverse cardiac events (which is the main cause of death in CKD subjects) [1].
Non-traditional risk factors (inflammation, proteinuria, anaemia, alterations in calcium and phosphate metabolism, oxidative stress) show an increased incidence as the kidney function declines. [2] Dyslipidaemia has an important role in the initiation of the atherosclerotic phenomenon, however, some important trials such as AURORA (a study to evaluate the use of rosuvastatin in subjects on regular haemodialysis: An Assessment of Survival and Cardiovascular Events) [3] and the 4D study (the German Diabetes and Dialysis Study–in German: Die Deutsche Diabetes Dialyse Studie) [4] revealed that statins did not improve the outcome of the patients with CKD, highlighting the fact that the disturbance of the lipid fractions is not elementary in the progression of the atheromatous plaque in subjects with impaired renal function [5]. Statins should represent an option in the early phases of the renal function deterioration, when the effect of the drugs is optimal. [6].
Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) encompass non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) [5]. In CKD patients, the presentation is atypical, and the main symptom is dyspnoea instead of the thoracic pain, and asymptomatic forms are usually detected in these patients . The impaired renal function interferes with the excretion of the cardiac necrosis biomarkers—the cardiac troponins (cTn), making the diagnosis of the ACS challenging. Myocardial infarction is defined as elevation of the cardiac necrosis biomarkers above the 99th percentile myocardial infarction of the healthy reference population, corroborated with specific chest pain and electrocardiographic signs of cardiac ischemia [6]. Guidelines elaborated by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommend serial measurements of the necrosis enzymes, proposing an algorithm that requires initial determination of the cTn followed by new assessments at 1 or 3 h [8]
An important aspect, the renal nihilism, illustrates a predisposition for choosing medical management in subjects with impaired kidney function instead of the interventional or surgical myocardial revascularization.[7] The outcome of the ACS in CKD subjects is negatively influenced by the mentioned therapeutic attitude and the underuse of appropriate doses of antiplatelet therapy or thrombolytic therapy explaining the increased rate of these patients’ cardiovascular mortality . The treatment of ACS in patients with CKD has many issues. Thus far, there is no optimal treatment strategy for this type of patients. There are questions and concerns on the treatment for CKD patients in the incipient phases of STEMI and about using the aggressive reperfusion strategy (which implies both fibrinolytic therapy and primary coronary revascularization procedure).[8]
In patients with STEMI, the trials have shown the effect of thrombolytic agents in reducing mortality, but in many of them, analysis was not performed for patients with CKD [9,10]. The risk of bleeding, especially the increased incidence of intracranial haemorrhage, constitutes a reason for the less frequent use of thrombolysis in patients with CKD. However, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may represent a favourable alternative therapy. A study conducted by Hobbach et al. revealed that the presence of CKD in a light to moderate form at the onset of STEMI determines a higher mortality rate in spite of using adequate therapy, but it also indicates the benefits of timely PCI for these patients [11]. Though the positive effect of pharmacological and mechanical coronary reperfusion in STEMI was proven, the optimum treatment scheme for STEMI patients also having CKD is still in discussion. Opinions about timely invasive scheme being indicated for patients with light CKD rather than behind time actions tended to fade away as the renal function deteriorated [12-15].
A comprehensive prospective observational study was carried out, involving a total of 140 patients who were admitted Department of General Medicine, JIIU’s Indian Institute of Medical Science and Research with a confirmed diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
The study was conducted at Department of General Medicine, JIIU’s Indian Institute of Medical Science and Research over a period of 6 months. The study aimed to gather detailed data on the clinical presentations, management strategiesandoutcomes associated with ACS in these patients, providing valuable insights into the regional variations and challenges in treating this condition.
Inclusion criteria: Patients were included if they demonstrated new evidence of myocardial ischemia on electrocardiography (ECG), which could be accompanied by angina or dyspnoea. Inclusion also required the presence of elevated myocardial necrosis enzymes, such as high-sensitivity troponins (hs-cTn), regardless of whether there was an elevation. Additionally, patients with normal or decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) wereconsidered eligible for the study.
Exclusion criteria: Patients were excluded if they had previous ECG changes indicative of myocardial ischemia without new signs of acute coronary disease. Other exclusion factors included myocardial injury with nonspecific elevation of cardiac necrosis enzymes due to conditions like sepsis, advanced heart failure, chronic kidney diseaseora history of cerebrovascular accidents.Data collection procedure We used demographic information, clinical historiesandpresenting symptoms were documented.[28] Diagnostic evaluations, including laboratory tests and imaging studies, were performed to confirm ACS and assess CKD severity.
Therapeutic interventions, in-hospital managementandany complications were meticulously recorded throughout the patients' hospital stays. Data were captured using a standardized collection form, ensuring consistency and accuracy.This comprehensive dataset was then analyzed to explore the clinical and therapeutic characteristics of ACS in patients with CKD, providing valuable insights into patient outcomes. ACS was defined as a patient presenting with positive cardiac troponin and one of the following: Chest discomfort with or without persistent ST-segment elevation (ECG alters that). This may include transient ST-segment elevation, whether sustained or transient Symptoms may include ST-segment depression, T-wave inversion, flat or pseudo-normalized T wavesornormal ECG. Imaging may also be required. Evidence of genuine myocardial loss or new regional wall motion.
Statical analysis: Data were collected using a pre-designed pro forma and managed in Microsoft Excel and SPSS-26. Quantitative data were presented as mean ± standard deviation, while qualitative data were summarized as frequencies and percentages. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-square tests and continuous variables were assessed with unpaired t-tests.EthicalconsiderationEthical guidelines for this study were strictly followed to safeguard the rights and welfare of all participants.[29] Conducted across multiple medical centers in Cumilla, Bangladesh, the study ensured that informed consent was acquired from each patient.
In table 1, Demographics Mean age 65.4 ± 10.8 years, 60% male. CKD stages: Stage 3 (40%), Stage 4 (35%), Stage 5 (25%).
Characteristic |
Value |
Total Patients (n) |
140 |
Mean Age (years) |
65.4 ± 10.8 |
Gender (Male, %) |
60% |
CKD Stage 3 (n, %) |
56 (40%) |
CKD Stage 4 (n, %) |
49 (35%) |
CKD Stage 5 (n, %) |
35 (25%) |
Risk Factor |
Prevalence (n, %) |
Diabetes Mellitus |
87 (62%) |
Hypertension |
112 (80%) |
Dyslipidemia |
95 (68%) |
Smoking History |
39 28%) |
In table 2, risk Factor of Hypertension was 80% (n = 112) followed by Dyslipidemia 68% (n = 95), Diabetes Mellitus 62% (n = 87) and Smoking History 28% (n = 39).
Management Strategy |
Utilization (n, %) |
Antiplatelets |
126 (90%) |
Statins |
119 (85%) |
Beta-blockers |
101 (72%) |
ACE inhibitors/ARBs |
91 (65%) |
PCI |
67 (48%) |
CABG |
17 (12%) |
Outcome |
Prevalence (n, %) |
In-hospital Mortality |
11 (8%) |
MACE at 30 Days |
21 (15%) |
Renal Decline |
25 (18%) |
In table 4, Outcomes In-hospital mortality (8%), MACE at 30 days (15%), renal function decline (18%).
Parameter |
Overall (Mean ± SD) |
eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m²) |
32.4 ± 8.7 |
Troponin (Mild Elevation) |
73 (52%) |
Troponin (High Elevation) |
67 (48%) |
Serum Potassium (Normo-) |
101 (72%) |
Serum Potassium (Hyper-) |
28 (20%) |
Serum Potassium (Hypo-) |
11 (8%) |
LDL-C (mg/dL) |
120 ± 28 |
HDL-C (mg/dL) |
42 ± 10 |
Triglycerides (mg/dL) |
165 ± 45 |
In table 5, Laboratory Findings Mean eGFR 32.4 ± 8.7 mL/min/1.73m²; hyperkalemia in 20%, LDL-C 120 ± 28 mg/dL.
Outcome |
Stage 3 (n=56) |
Stage 4 (n=49) |
Stage 5 (n=35) |
Heart Failure |
12 (21%) |
11 (22%) |
8 (23%) |
Dialysis Initiation |
2 (4%) |
6 (12%) |
6 (17%) |
Major Bleeding |
5 (9%) |
7 (14%) |
5 (14%) |
Adverse Events Heart failure (22%), dialysis initiation (10%), major bleeding (12%).
The findings from this study highlight the complex interplay between chronic kidney disease (CKD) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS), emphasizing the increased cardiovascular risk and the challenges in managing this high-risk patient population.
The high prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension (80%), diabetes mellitus (62%), and dyslipidemia (68%) among CKD patients underscores the systemic nature of cardiovascular disease in this population.[16] CKD is also independently associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, and vascular calcification, all of which exacerbate cardiovascular risk. These findings align with prior research that identifies CKD as a major non-traditional risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
The distribution of ACS types (STEMI: 38%, NSTEMI: 47%, Unstable Angina: 15%) indicates that CKD patients are more likely to present with NSTEMI or unstable angina, consistent with literature suggesting atypical presentations and delayed diagnosis in this population.[17] Despite the clear benefits of evidence-based therapies such as PCI, CABG, and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), their use was notably lower in advanced CKD stages (PCI in Stage 3: 57% vs. Stage 5: 37%).[18] This reflects the clinical dilemma faced by physicians, who must balance the benefits of revascularization against the risks of procedural complications, bleeding, and contrast-induced nephropathy.[18]
In-hospital mortality (8%) and 30-day MACE rates (15%) were relatively high, highlighting the poor short-term prognosis of CKD patients with ACS. Moreover, the progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 15% of patients and dialysis initiation in 10% suggest that ACS exacerbates renal dysfunction, likely due to hemodynamic instability,[19] nephrotoxic medications, and procedural risks.[20] Major bleeding events (12%), predominantly associated with antiplatelet therapy and invasive procedures, further complicate management, especially in advanced CKD.
Subgroup analysis revealed important trends by CKD stage. Patients in Stage 5 had the lowest rates of PCI (37%) and DAPT utilization (80%), suggesting an underuse of guideline-recommended therapies in this subgroup.[21] While concerns about safety are justified, recent studies suggest that selected patients with advanced CKD may still benefit from revascularization. This highlights the need for individualized risk-benefit assessments and multidisciplinary decision-making.
At 6 months, mortality (18%), ACS readmission (12%), and ESRD progression (15%) were concerning, suggesting poor long-term outcomes.[22] These findings reflect the need for intensified follow-up and optimized medical therapy to mitigate recurrent events[23]. Strategies such as aggressive risk factor control (blood pressure, lipid management) and careful monitoring of renal function are critical in improving outcomes.
This study underscores the importance of tailoring ACS management to the unique needs of CKD patients. Early recognition of ACS, judicious use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions,[24, 25] and multidisciplinary care involving cardiologists, nephrologists, and critical care specialists are essential. Novel strategies, such as low-dose antiplatelet regimens, use of non-contrast imaging, and patient-specific revascularization protocols, should be explored further.
CKD - of any degree - is present in a substantial proportion of patients with ACS, and represents a potent and independent risk factor for adverse outcome. Unfortunately, data are still limited regarding the value of most therapeutic interventions, because CKD patients with ACS have typically been excluded from randomized trials. Thus, our current challenge is to further study these high-risk patients in prospective randomized trials in order to identify adjunctive pharmacological therapies and newer interventional strategies that may favorably affect their otherwise poor prognosis. Nevertheless, as long as evidence-based data are not provided to guide clinical practice, all attempts must be made to promote the use of more aggressive therapies, when they can be applied with an acceptable level of safety.
CKD significantly complicates the management and prognosis of ACS. Despite advances in cardiovascular care, CKD patients remain at a disproportionately high risk for adverse events. There is a critical need for tailored interventions, robust risk stratification tools, and multidisciplinary collaboration to improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.