Evaluation of the role of distal revascularization with interval ligation (DRIL) and revision using distal inflow (RUDI) in treatment of dialysis associated steal syndrome

Abstract

Objective: Dialysis-associated steal syndrome (DASS) is a complication that may occur in >4% of patients with arteriovenous fistula. The best treatment method for this condition is up till now controversial. Aim of the work: The purpose of this study was to evaluate two common procedures to treat this condition; Distal Revascularization with Interval Ligation (DRIL) or Revision Using Distal Inflow (RUDI) aiming at preservation of both the function of the fistula and the limb. Patients and methods: Fourteen patients having native brachiocephalic or brachiobasilic hemodialysis AV fistula complicated by dialysis associated steal syndrome (DASS), were randomly divided according to treatment method into DRIL and RUDI groups with 7 patients in each group. Patients with proximal or distal arterial disease and those with low-flow steal were excluded Short term access patency and limb salvage were set as primary endpoints. In all patients great saphenous vein was harvested from the thigh. Early post-procedural follow up and mid-term follow up were after one and three months. Results: From November 2011 to March 2013, 14 patients presented with (DASS). In DRIL group (7 patients), the mean age was 49.2 years, 4 females and 4 diabetics while in RUDI group (7 patients), the mean age was 52.3 years, 5 females and 7 diabetics. All fistulas were brachiocephalic and only one was brachiobasilic AVF in DRIL group. All patients in both groups presented with pain, pallor, coldness and cyanosis of the hand Stage III DASS {rest pain) was present in 2 cases of each group, whereas Stage IV small superficial ulcers were present in 3 vs 4 and digital gangrene in 2 vs. 1 in DRIL vs. RUDI respectively In group 1 (DRIL) technique; 5 patients (71.4%) had marked improvement of pain, cyanosis, capillary refill and coldness. Pallor improved in all cases. Distal pulses returned in 4 patients, remained weak in one patient and failed to return in 2 (28.6%). Closure of the access was necessary in 2 patients due to infection in one and due to risk of limb loss in the other; access patency was (71.4%) and limb salvage was (100%). In RUDI cases, pain, hand coldness, pallor and cyanosis greatly improved in all cases post-operatively. Distal pulses and capillary refill returned and became comparable to the healthy side in 6 patients (85 7%). Limb salvage and access patency were achieved in all cases (100%). Conclusion: RUDI procedure incorporates most of the advantages of other access and hand-preserving procedures. In contrast to DRIL procedure, it is the fistula that is placed at risk by ligation and revascularization, not the native arterial supply to the ischemic hand RUDI may become the procedure of choice for patients with dialysis-associated steal syndrome after a brachial artery-based arteriovenous fistula.