Abstract
We present a comparison of renal function outcomes during HTAR with the use of a new hybrid vascular graft (GHVG) or standard graft. It is a multicenter, retrospective, observational study. Between January 2015 and March 2019, 36 patients were treated with HTAR. We compared HTAR performed with the use of the GHVG and with the use of standard bypass graft. Primary outcome measures were hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI) at 30days and GHVG patency. Mean GHVG ischemia time was significantly lower for both renal arteries (right: GHVG, 4 ± 2 vs. standard graft, 15 ± 7min; 95% CI 2.23-6.69, P < 0.001; left: GHVG, 3 ± 2 vs. standard graft, 13 ± 7min; 95% CI 2.44-5.03, P < 0.001). Hospital mortality was 17% (6/36); while mortality did not differ between the two groups, postoperative acute kidney injury rate was 30.5% (11/36 patients) and was more common in the standard graft group (7% vs. 29%; OR 3.2, P = 0.074). Estimated primary patency was 92% ± 2 (95% CI 79.5-97%) at 36months and was not different between the two groups (GHVG 94% ± 6 vs. standard graft 91% ± 6; log-rank χ2 = 0.260, P = 0.610). In our experience of HTAR, ischemia time was significantly shorter and postoperative AKI occurrence was lower with GHVG if compared to standard graft bypass, with satisfactory midterm patency rate comparable to that of standard graft bypass.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.