Extremity Arteriovenous Access Research Articles

A comparison of stenting versus hemodialysis reliable outflow graft for hemodialysis patients with recurrent central venous obstructions

BackgroundCentral venous occlusive disease is a common cause of upper extremity arteriovenous access dysfunction in hemodialysis patients. When refractory to balloon angioplasty, the treatment options include central venous stenting and hemodialysis reliable outflow (HeRO; Merit Medical, South Jordan, Utah) graft. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the outcomes of these options. MethodsA retrospective review was performed of patients who had undergone central venous stenting or HeRO placement for central venous obstruction from December 2008 to March 2018. The primary outcomes were the reintervention rates, patency, and mortality. ResultsA total of 75 hemodialysis patients were identified after failed balloon angioplasty for central venous obstruction. Of the 75 patients, 44 underwent central venous stenting comprising coverage of the subclavian vein (n = 27), innominate vein (n = 18), and/or superior vena cava (n = 5). Six stent patients later underwent HeRO placement. The stents used were stent grafts in 65% (Viabahn, n = 9; Fluency/Flair, n = 19; iCast, n = 2; and other, n = 1) and bare metal stents in 35% (Wall-stent, n = 6; Protégé, n = 1; Cobalt, n = 1; and other, n = 9). The remaining 31 patients underwent HeRO graft placement. The venous outflow component insertion sites were the internal jugular (n = 20), external jugular (n = 1), subclavian (n = 6), axillary (n = 2), and other (n = 2). The stent and HeRO groups were similar in the previous central venous intervention rates (median, 0.6 [interquartile range (IQR), 0-3.0]; vs median, 3.5 [IQR, 0-10.1] annually; P = .679). After the index procedure, no difference was found between the two groups in the frequency of dialysis circuit interventions annually (median, 2.0 [IQR, 0-6.0]; vs median, 2.0 [IQR, 0-7.0]; P = .291) nor central venous interventions (ie, angioplasty of the central veins or within the portion of the HeRO inside the central veins) annually (median, 2.0 [IQR, 0-4.1]; vs median, 0 [IQR, 0-2.4]; P = .419). The 1-year access circuit primary patency was 8.1% for stenting and 22.2% for HeRO (P = .109). The 2-year access circuit secondary patency was 40.0% for stenting and 52.4% for HeRO (P = .401). The all-cause mortality was similar at 1 year (3.7% vs 4.8%; P = .856) and 2 years (11.8% vs 23.5%; P = .368). ConclusionsCentral venous stenting and HeRO were shown to have similar rates of reintervention and patency. The results from the present study suggest that the multiple treatment options available for this problematic disease process can yield similar results when careful patient selection is applied.

Octogenarians and Nonoctogenarians Have Similar Outcomes after Upper Extremity Hemodialysis Access Creation

Routine arteriovenous (AV) access creation in octogenarians is controversial. Our goal was to assess perioperative and long-term outcomes in octogenarians after undergoing upper extremity AV access to determine whether advanced age should influence AV access decision-making. All AV access creations performed at a single institution from 2014-2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized as octogenarians and nonoctogenarians. Perioperative short-term outcomes were compared. Among 620 patients who underwent AV access creation, there were 40 octogenarians and 580 nonoctogenarians. Octogenarians were more likely to have private insurance, coronary artery disease, dementia, previous stroke, impaired ambulation, and less likely to be current smokers. There were no differences in outpatient status or tunneled dialysis catheter presence at creation. Access types were similar radiocephalic (12.5% vs. 14.3%), brachiocephalic (50% vs. 42.6%), brachiobasilic (12.5% vs. 26.2%), and grafts (25% vs. 13.8%). Univariable analysis demonstrated no differences in perioperative return to the operating room, hematoma, and patency loss. There were no differences in 90-day mortality (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0-2.5, P=0.25), readmission (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.67-2.76, P=0.39), maturation (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46-2.01, P=0.93), or reintervention (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.64-1.25, P=0.53). Octogenarians had lower two-year survival (82.5% vs. 91.9%, P<0.001), but there was no difference in reintervention-free survival (55% vs. 47%, P=0.47) or occlusion-free survival (25% vs. 24%, P=0.62). Octogenarians and nonoctogenarians have similar outcomes after upper extremity dialysis access creation. Advanced age alone should not influence dialysis access creation.

Higher body mass index is associated with reinterventions and lower maturation rates after upper extremity arteriovenous access creation

ObjectiveA patient's body mass index (BMI) can affect both perioperative and postoperative outcomes across all surgical specialties. Given that obesity and end-stage renal disease are growing in prevalence, we aimed to evaluate the association between BMI and outcomes of upper extremity arteriovenous (AV) access creation. MethodsA retrospective single-institution review was conducted for AV access creations from 2014 to 2018. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and AV access details were recorded. BMI groups were defined as normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), obese (30-39.9 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (>40 kg/m2). Perioperative complications and long-term outcomes including access maturation (defined as access being used for hemodialysis or the surgeon's judgment that access was ready for use in patients not yet on hemodialysis), occlusion, and reintervention were evaluated. ResultsA total of 611 upper extremity AV access creations were performed on patients who were normal weight (29.6%), overweight (31.3%), obese (29.6%), and morbidly obese (9.5%). Access type included brachiocephalic (43.2%), brachiobasilic (25.5%), and radiocephalic (14.2%) fistulas and AV grafts (14.2%). Median age was 60.9 years, and 59.6% were male. Univariable analysis showed no difference between BMI groups for perioperative steal, hematoma, home discharge, or 30-day primary patency. Freedom from reintervention at 2 years on Kaplan-Meier analysis differed by BMI (44.5% ± 4.6% normal weight, 29% ± 3.8% overweight, 39.8% ± 4.3% obese, 34.7% ± 8% morbidly obese; P = .041). There was no difference in 2-year freedom from new access creation or survival. AV access maturity within 180 days differed between BMI groups (74.3% normal weight, 66% overweight, 65.7% obese, 46.6% morbidly obese; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, failure to mature within 180 days was associated with overweight (odds ratio [OR], 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-3.29; P = .002), obese (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.19-3.47; P = .009), and morbidly obese (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.85-7.3; P < .001) relative to normal weight BMI. AV access reintervention was associated with overweight (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83; 95% CI, 1.34-2.5), obese (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.16), and morbidly obese (HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.1-2.58; P = .02) relative to normal weight BMI. BMI was not independently associated with long-term readmission or survival. ConclusionsObesity is associated with higher rates of AV access failure to mature and reintervention. Surgeons performing access creation on obese patients must consider this for planning and setting expectations. Weight loss assistance may need to be incorporated into treatment algorithms.

Patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection do not have inferior outcomes after dialysis access creation

ObjectiveDespite improvements in treating human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), the risk of end-stage renal disease and need for long-term arteriovenous (AV) access for hemodialysis remain high in HIV-infected patients. Associations of HIV/AIDS with AV access creation complications have been conflicting. Our goal was to clarify short- and long-term outcomes of patients with HIV/AIDS undergoing AV access creation. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative registry was queried from 2011 to 2018 for all patients undergoing AV access creation. Documentation of HIV infection status with or without AIDS was recorded. Data were propensity score matched (4:1) between non-HIV-infected patients and HIV/AIDS patients. Subsequent multivariable analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed for short- and long-term outcomes. ResultsThere were 25,711 upper extremity AV access creations identified: 25,186 without HIV infection (98%), 424 (1.6%) with HIV infection, and 101 (.4%) with AIDS. Mean age was 61.8 years, and 55.8% were male. Patients with HIV/AIDS were more often younger, male, nonwhite, nonobese, and current smokers; they were more often on Medicaid and more likely to have a history of intravenous drug use, and they were less often diabetic and less likely to have cardiac comorbidities (P < .05 for all). There was no significant difference in autogenous or prosthetic access used in these cohorts. Wound infection requiring incision and drainage or explantation within 90 days was low for all groups (0.6% vs 1.9 vs 0%; P = .11) of non-HIV-infected patients vs HIV-infected patients vs AIDS patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in 1-year freedom from primary patency loss (43.9% vs 46.3%; P =.6), 1-year freedom from reintervention (61% vs 60.7%,; P = .81), or 3-year survival (83% vs 83.8%; P = .57) for those with and without HIV/AIDS, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that patients with HIV/AIDS were not at significantly higher risk for access reintervention (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.24; P = .81), occlusion (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.29; P = .6), or mortality (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.83-1.43; P = .57). ConclusionsPatients with HIV/AIDS undergoing AV access creation have outcomes similar to those of patients without HIV infection, including long-term survival. Patients with HIV/AIDS had fewer traditional end-stage renal disease risk factors compared with non-HIV-infected patients. Our findings show that the contemporary approach for creation and management of AV access in patients with HIV/AIDS should be continued; however, further research is needed to identify risk factors in this population.

Do Characteristics in Patient History Predict Digital Pressures in Hemodialysis Patients Harbouring an Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access? A Cross Sectional Study

Do Characteristics in Patient History Predict Digital Pressures in Hemodialysis Patients Harbouring an Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access? A Cross Sectional Study

Patients with lower extremity dialysis access have poor primary patency and survival

ObjectiveLower extremity arteriovenous (AV) access is an alternative when upper extremity access options have been exhausted. Our goal was to assess short- and medium-term outcomes of lower extremity hemodialysis access. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative was reviewed for all lower extremity AV hemodialysis cases. Patient and case details were recorded. Multivariable analysis was used to analyze outcomes. ResultsWe identified 463 lower extremity AV access cases in the VQI registry. There were 56 AVF (12.1%) and 407 AVG (87.9%). The mean age was 56 ± 15 years, 46.9% were male, and 40.7% were Caucasian. The majority (90%) had a previous upper extremity AV access and 25.4% had a prior lower extremity access. More than one-half (57.9%) had a tunneled line at the time of the procedure. Patients undergoing an AVF vs AVG creation were younger, more often ambulatory, and less often with peripheral arterial disease. For AVF, the superficial femoral artery was more often used for access inflow (76.8% vs 49.4%; P < .001), compared with AVG, and there was no difference in using femoral vein as the main outflow (78.6% vs 82.6%; P = .466). For AVF, compared with AVG, there was no difference in wound infection (12.5% vs 9.6%; P = .571), ischemic steal (5% vs 2.2%; P = .273), or leg swelling (2.5% vs 3.3%; P = .99) at 6 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the overall cohort showed that freedom from loss of primary patency at 6 months was 52.9%, freedom from any reintervention at 6 months was 75.3%, and the 1-year survival was 81.9%. Survival at 5 years was 65.5%. Multivariable analysis showed no significant association of access type (AVF vs AVG) with primary patency loss or death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-1.5; P = .4), any reintervention or death (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.82-3.33; P = .163), or mortality (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.71-5.33; P = .197). Factors independently associated with primary patency loss or death included peripheral arterial disease (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.06-2.42; P = .03) and obesity (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.05; P = .01). Any reintervention or death was associated with obesity (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.09-2.56; P = .015). Mortality was associated with congestive heart failure (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13-2.94; P = .015) and white race (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.08-2.73; P = .023). ConclusionsIn our contemporary multicenter analysis, patients undergoing lower extremity AV access creation have low primary access patency and almost 20% mortality at 1 year. These results should be considered when suggesting a lower extremity dialysis access, as well as other dialysis alternatives when available.

Snuffbox arteriovenous fistulas have similar outcomes and patency as wrist arteriovenous fistulas

ObjectiveRadial artery-based wrist arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are commonly created as an initial upper extremity arteriovenous access. A more distal access site, such as the anatomic snuffbox AVF, can also be created. Although much has been written about wrist AVFs, outcomes of snuffbox AVFs are unclear. Our goal was to compare perioperative and midterm outcomes between these two types of distal access. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all patients undergoing snuffbox AVFs and wrist AVFs from 2011 to 2017. Unmatched and matched analyses were performed for baseline characteristics and outcomes at 6 months for ischemic steal, wound infection, and arm swelling. Multivariable analysis was performed for unmatched and matched analyses for primary patency, surgical or endovascular repair, and patient survival. Kaplan-Meier matched analysis was performed for primary patency, freedom from surgical or endovascular intervention, and survival. ResultsWe identified 4525 distal forearm fistulas: 179 (4%) snuffbox AVFs and 4346 (96%) wrist AVFs. The average age was 59 ± 14.7 years, and 72.3% of patients were male. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics or comorbidities of patients with snuffbox AVFs and wrist AVFs except that patients with snuffbox AVFs had fewer tunneled lines at access creation (70.2% vs 65.2%; P = .046) and had a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists class. There were no significant differences in unmatched outcomes at 6 months for ischemic steal (0.8% vs 1.9%; P = .336), wound infection (0% vs 0.2%; P = .649), and arm swelling (0.8% vs 1.3%; P = .592). Matched analysis showed no significant differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes at 6 months for ischemic steal (0% vs 1.8%; P = .146), wound infection (0% vs 0%), and arm swelling (0.9% vs 1.2%; P = .789). Kaplan-Meier matched analysis showed no significant differences between snuffbox AVFs and wrist AVFs at 6 months for primary patency (51% vs 48%; P = .61), freedom from endovascular intervention (84.5% vs 82.5%; P = .98), freedom from surgical intervention (90% vs 86%; P = .08), and survival (92% vs 96%; P = .1). In multivariable analysis of unmatched data, snuffbox AVFs and wrist AVFs had similar primary patency (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.26; P = .83), likelihood of surgical intervention (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35-1.05; P = .074) and endovascular intervention (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.65-1.42; P = .83), and survival (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.9-2.4; P = .128). ConclusionsSnuffbox AVFs have midterm results similar to those of wrist AVFs.

Tapered arteriovenous grafts do not provide significant advantage over nontapered grafts in upper extremity dialysis access

ObjectiveAlthough tapered dialysis access grafts are often used in an effort to prevent ischemic steal, their efficacy is uncertain. Our goal was to use real-world data to assess the performance of these grafts with respect to primary patency and ischemic steal. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried from 2010 to 2017 for all patients undergoing tapered dialysis grafts in the upper arm. Multivariable analysis was performed to analyze primary patency, ischemic steal, and reinterventions. ResultsWe identified 3608 patients who received dialysis access grafts, 1473 tapered grafts and 2135 nontapered grafts. The mean age was 64.8 years, and 43.4% of the patients were male. Tapered grafts were used more often in female patients (60.5% vs 54%), nonwhite patients (53.3% vs 47.7%), patients with no previous access (28% vs 26.3%), grafts with an antecubital brachial artery origin (50% vs 44.4%), and grafts with an antecubital cephalic vein target (7.4% vs 3.7%; P < .05). Three-month outcomes between tapered and nontapered grafts were similar for wound infection (1.4% vs 2%; P = .31), ischemic steal (4.1% vs 4.6%; P = .58), and arm swelling (3.5% vs 2.9%; P = .38). Multivariable analyses revealed that in comparison to nontapered grafts, tapered grafts did not affect primary patency rates (hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.42; P = .11), ischemic steal (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.64-1.65; P = .92), difference in endovascular reintervention (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.74-1.16; P = .5), or operative reintervention (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.86-1.82; P = .24). ConclusionsTapered grafts for upper extremity arteriovenous access do not affect primary patency, development of steal, or endovascular reintervention in comparison to nontapered grafts. Our findings do not support the routine use of these grafts in dialysis access to improve outcomes.

Intraoperative Heparin Use during Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access Creation Does Not Affect Outcomes

There are conflicting data about the effect of heparin use on perioperative outcomes during upper extremity arteriovenous (AV) access creation. Our goal was to assess the effect of the use and degree of intraoperative heparin on perioperative outcomes after AV access creation. All upper extremity AV access cases performed at a tertiary academic medical center between 2014 and 2017 were reviewed. Patient and procedural details including intraoperative heparin use and dosing as well as protamine use were analyzed. Full heparin dose was defined as 80-100 U/kg and partial heparin dose as less than 80 U/kg. Perioperative arterial thrombosis or distal embolism, hematoma, and early loss of primary patency within 30days were evaluated. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess the effect of heparin use. There were 550 AV access cases identified: brachiocephalic (37.5%), brachiobasilic (29.3%), and radiocephalic fistulas (12.9%), and AV grafts (16.9%). Average patient age was 62.6years and 58.9% were male. Full heparinization was used in 21.3%, partial heparinization in 58.7%, and no heparin was used in 20% of cases. Protamine was used in 94.9% of full heparin cases and 51.4% of partial heparin cases. No perioperative arterial thrombosis or distal embolism was observed. Perioperative wound hematoma rate was 3.4%, 3.1%, and 0.9% in full heparin, partial heparin, and no heparin cohorts, respectively (P=0.42). Early loss of primary patency was 11.1%, 7.7%, and 6.4% for full heparin, partial heparin, and no heparin cases, respectively (P=0.39). There were no differences in return to the operating room or perioperative survival. On multivariable analysis, full heparin use (odds ratio [OR] 3.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-35.9, P=0.24) and partial heparin (OR 4.03, 95% CI 0.5-32.6, P=0.19) use were not significantly different from no heparin cases with respect to 30-day perioperative hematoma rate. Full heparin (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.65-4.78, P=0.26) and partial heparin (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.46-2.75, P=0.79) were not significantly different from no heparin cases with respect to early loss of primary patency. Intraoperative heparin use, at full or partial doses, did not affect perioperative outcomes after AV access creation. Overall complication event rate was low for all groups. AV access can be safely performed without intraoperative heparin use.

IP153. Snuffbox Arteriovenous Fistulas Have Similar Outcomes and Patency to Wrist Arteriovenous Fistulas

Radial artery-based wrist arteriovenous fistulas (WAVFs) are a common site of initial upper extremity arteriovenous access. However, data on more distal access, such as in the anatomic snuffbox AVF (SBAVF), are unclear. Our goal was to compare perioperative and midterm outcomes between the two types of distal accesses. The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all patients undergoing SBAVF and WAVF from 2011 to 2017. Multivariable analysis was performed to analyze outcomes. We identified 4525 distal arm fistulas (179 SBAVFs and 4346 WAVFs). The average age was 59 ± 14.7 years, and 72.3% were male. There were no differences in the patients’ demographics or comorbidities aside from SBAVF patients more often without a tunneled line (70.2% vs 65.2%; P = .046). There was no difference in steal (0.8% vs 1.9%; P = .34) and wound infection (0% vs 0.2%; P = .65) reported within 6 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis shows there was no difference between SBAVF and WAVF at 6 months for primary patency (51.2% vs 49.9%; P = .65), freedom from surgical revision (88.7% vs 84.7%; P = .09), freedom from endovascular revision (92.5% vs 95.7%; P = .46), and survival (92.5% vs 96.3%; P = .23). SBAVF compared with WAVF did not affect primary patency (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.26; P = .83), surgical revision (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35-1.05; P = .074), endovascular revision (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.65-1.42; P = .83), and survival (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.9-2.4; P = .128). SBAVFs have similar midterm results to those of WAVFs. When adequate vein is available, this represents an additional site for distal access to help preserve more proximal access sites for future use.

Placement of Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access in Patients with Central Venous Occlusions: A Novel Technique

Central venous occlusion is a common occurrence in patients with end-stage renal disease. Placement of upper extremity arteriovenous access in patients with occlusion of the brachiocephalic veins is often not an option. Avoidance of lower extremity vascular access can decrease morbidity and infection. The central venous lesions were crossed centrally via femoral access. The wire was retrieved in the neck extravascularly. A Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow catheter was then placed in the right atrium and completed with an arterial anastomosis. We describe a novel technique for placing upper extremity arteriovenous access in patients with occlusion of the brachiocephalic veins. This technique was utilized in 3 patients. The technical success was 100%. The placement of upper extremity arteriovenous access in patients with central venous occlusions is technically feasible.

Placement of Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access in Patients with Central Venous Occlusions

Placement of Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Access in Patients with Central Venous Occlusions

Evaluation for Hypoperfusion Distal to Arteriovenous Vascular Access Using Skin Perfusion Pressure in Fingers

The usefulness of skin perfusion pressure (SPP) measurement in the assessment of critical ischemia of the lower limb has previously been established. This study investigated whether finger SPP measurement is useful to evaluate hypoperfusion distal to arteriovenous vascular access in dialysis patients. Seventeen asymptomatic hemodialysis patients with upper extremity arteriovenous access and 17 non-dialysis control patients were prospectively examined. SPP in the thumb, the middle finger and the little finger of both hands was measured. The bilateral difference of the mean SPP of the three fingers was evaluated. The mean difference of SPP between the contralateral and the arteriovenous access sides among hemodialysis patients (33±2 5 mmHg) was significantly larger than the mean difference of SPP between the left and the right hands among control patients (1.0±6.0 mmHg, p<0.01). This report shows the potential usefulness of SPP measurement to evaluate hypoperfusion distal to arteriovenous vascular access.

Use of digital pressure measurements for the diagnosis of AV access-induced hand ischemia

Diagnosis of hand ischemia secondary to an arteriovenous (AV) hemodialysis access is predominantly based on clinical findings. Occasionally, this diagnosis is unclear and more objective diagnostic testing is needed. No validated method of objective testing currently exists. The purpose of this study is to evaluate digital pressure measurements in the diagnosis of AV access-induced hand ischemia. A case-control study of 40 patients with an upper extremity AV access consisted of 15 patients (38%) with clinical AV access-induced hand ischemia and 25 patients (62%) without clinical evidence of ischemia. Arterial pressure in the third finger ipsilateral to the AV access was measured by digital photoplethysmography. Basal digital pressure (BDP), digital to contralateral brachial index (DBI), and change in digital pressure with access compression (CDP) were determined. Logistic regression modeling with gains tables and ROC calculations were used to determine optimal test thresholds and to test model discrimination for predicting AV access-induced hand ischemia. The mean BDP (30 vs 102 mmHg; p < 0.001) and mean DBI (0.3 vs 0.8; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in patients with AV access-induced hand ischemia than in those without. The accuracy for determining hand ischemia using a threshold-adjusted BDP of 60 mmHg was 92% (sensitivity 100%, specificity 87%) and using DBI of 0.4 was 94% (sensitivity 92%, specificity 96%). While the mean CDP was significantly higher in patients with hand ischemia (85 vs 40; p < 0.001), the accuracy for predicting ischemia was marginal (78%). In conclusion, a BDP less than 60 mmHg or a DBI less than 0.4 in a patient with an AV access were highly associated with hand ischemia. CDP's marginal discrimination ability likely stems from the presence of asymptomatic physiologic steal in the group without clinical steal. Nonetheless, CDP may be useful in identifying patients with ischemia who will not benefit from an intervention that specifically targets the AV access.

Axillary-axillary interarterial chest loop conduit as an alternative for chronic hemodialysis access

After exhaustion of all conventional arteriovenous (AV) access options, an alternative approach is an arterioarterial conduit. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of an axillary-axillary (AA) interarterial (IA) access in this subset of patients. A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent placement of an AA IA access. Patients were observed for functional aspects and complications. Outcomes were determined according to the Society for Vascular Surgery/American Association for Vascular Surgery standards for reports for dealing with AV accesses. Twenty patients (median age, 59 years; range, 41-82 years) underwent AA IA access placement under general anesthesia between May 2001 and December 2004. Exhausted upper extremity AV access options were found in 14 patients (70%), with central vein occlusion in 5 patients (25%), and 12 patients (60%) had ischemia from steal syndrome. High-output cardiac failure was present in one patient. Median follow-up was 7.4 months (range, 0.5-45.3 months). The 30-day perioperative mortality rate was 5%. There was one (5%) early access thrombosis that resulted in moderate ischemia. Late access thrombosis occurred in three patients (15%), and all cases were asymptomatic. Early postoperative bleeding necessitated surgical intervention in four patients (20%). Late graft infection (n = 1; 5%) occurred after repeated thrombectomy. The primary and secondary patency rate was 90% and 93%, respectively, at 6 months. This short-term initial study showed that the AA IA loop access could be implanted with acceptable perioperative morbidity and with an excellent secondary patency rate. Further follow-up is necessary to determine the long-term complication rate and to allow more reasonable comparison with other methods of access.

Endovascular management of central venous stenoses in the hemodialysis patient: results of percutaneous therapy.

The purpose of this study was to determine the functional results of transvenous angioplasty for the treatment of central venous stenoses in patients with failing upper extremity arteriovenous access. Two hundred consecutive patients presented with threatened arteriovenous access from January 1999 through July 2002. Angiographic evidence of central venous stenosis was present in 35 patients (18%) (superior vena cava 5, brachiocephalic veins 14, and subclavian veins 18). Follow-up averaged 873 days from the date of initial intervention. The initial technical success rate was 89%. Primary patency for each intervention was 85% at 30 days, 55% at 6 months, 43% at 1 year, and 0% at 2 years. Assisted primary patency rates were 88% at 30 days, 80% at 1 year, and 64% at 2 years. Freedom from central venous dialysis catheter placement was 82% at 30 days, 63% at 3 months, 51% at 1 year, 37% at 2 years, and 25% at 3 years. Freedom from a dialysis catheter was superior in those patients with autogenous arteriovenous fistulas. Transvenous angioplasty appears to be beneficial for hemodialysis patients with central venous stenoses, and it helps preserve functional access in the affected extremity, particularly in patients with autogenous fistulas.

Prosthetic thigh arteriovenous access: outcome with SVS/AAVS reporting standards.

Differences in the reporting methods of results for arteriovenous (AV) access can dramatically affect apparent outcome. To enable meaningful comparisons in the literature, the Society for Vascular Surgery and the American Association for Vascular Surgery (SVS/AAVS) recently published reporting standards for dialysis access. The purpose of the present study was to determine infection rates, patency rates, and possible predictive factors for prosthetic thigh AV access outcomes with the reporting standards of the SVS/AAVS. A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients who underwent placement of thigh AV access by the Surgical Teaching Service at Greenville Memorial Hospital between 1989 and 2001. Outcomes were determined based on SVS/AAVS Standards for Reports Dealing with AV Accesses. The rate of revision per year of access patency was also determined; this end point more accurately reflects the true cost and morbidity associated with AV access than do patency or infection rates alone. One hundred twenty-five polytetrafluoroethylene thigh AV accesses were placed in 100 patients. Nine accesses were excluded from the study, six because there was no patient follow-up and 3 as a result of deaths unrelated to the access procedure and which occurred less than 30 days after access placement. There were six (4%) late access-related deaths. There were 18 (15%) early access failures, related to infection in 14 cases (12%), thrombosis in three cases (2%), and steal in one case (1%). Early failure was more common in patients with diabetes mellitus (P =.036). The primary and secondary functional patency rates were 19% and 54%, respectively, at 2 years. Infection occurred in 48 (41%) accesses. The patency and infection rates were not influenced by patient age, gender, body mass index, or diabetes mellitus. The median number of interventions per year of access patency was 1.68, and this outcome was positively correlated with body mass index (P <.001). Prosthetic AV access in the thigh is associated with higher morbidity compared with that reported for the upper extremity, and should be considered only if no upper extremity AV access option is available. Early access failure and the requirement for an increased number of interventions to reestablish and maintain access patency are more common in patients with diabetes mellitus and obesity. The number of interventions per year of access patency is a valuable end point when assessing the outcome of AV access procedures.

Superiority of Autogenous Arteriovenous Hemodialysis Access: Maintenance of Function with Fewer Secondary Interventions

The National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF K/DOQI) guidelines have advocated autogenous arteriovenous fistulae as a primary procedure for hemodialysis access. This study compared the clinical outcomes between autogenous and prosthetic arteriovenous hemodialysis accesses, determining factors contributing to primary and secondary patency and function. Associated risk factors and number of interventions required to maintain secondary patency in each cohort were also assessed. A vascular database review of consecutive hemodialysis access procedures performed during a 36-month period (January 1999 to December 2001) at an academic institution was conducted. Life-table and log-rank analyses were used to analyze patency rates. Univariate and multivariate analysis was used to analyze risk factor influence on patency and function. A total of 231 upper extremity arteriovenous access procedures were performed in 209 patients during this period. One hundred autogenous accesses were created in 100 patients, 68 being forearm Brescia-Cimino arteriovenous fistulae. A total of 131 prosthetic accesses (ePTFE) grafts were also placed during this period in 109 patients. The demographic profiles of both cohorts were similar. Primary patency at 1 and 2 years was 56% (CI 45-76%) and 39% (CI 28-50%), respectively, in the autogenous group, and 36% (CI 26-45%) and 9% (CI 3-14%), respectively, in the prosthetic group. Differences in secondary patency at 1 year and 2 years were not significant (64% [CI 54-74%] and 53% [CI 42-65%] in the autogenous group vs. 65% [CI 55-73%] and 46% [CI 36-55%] in the prosthetic group). Secondary interventions were required in 87% of the prosthetic cohort (average 0.92 procedures/patient/year) and 57% of the autogenous cohort (average 0.53 procedures/patient/year). Multivariate analysis of associated risk factors demonstrated no significant effects on either primary or secondary patency in both groups. Autogenous accesses have superior primary patency and maintain equal secondary patency with significantly fewer interventions. These data strongly support the NKF K/DOQI guidelines recommending creation of autogenous access whenever possible. These outcomes can provide significant health-care cost benefits when using an algorithm favoring primary creation of autogenous access for hemodialysis.

Incidence and Characteristics of Patients with Hand Ischemia after a Hemodialysis Access Procedure

The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of chronic renal failure patients who developed hand ischemia in the limb carrying the dialysis angioaccess. A retrospective review of the charts of 352 patients who underwent 409 upper extremity arteriovenous access, and who were subsequently diagnosed as steal syndrome, was performed at the Emory University Hospital between February 1992 and January 1997. Hand ischemia occurred after 13 of 299 arteriovenous grafts (4.3%) and after 2 of 110 direct forearm arteriovenous fistulas (1.8%). Six patients developed ischemic manifestations immediately postoperatively, 2 in the first week, 4 after 1 month, and 1 after 1 year. Thirteen occurred in association with the primary access procedure. Two cases occurred following graft thrombectomy and outflow dilatation. Seven patients were mildly symptomatic with dialysis-induced pain, coldness, or numbness; 8 patients developed severe ischemic manifestations in the form of sensory loss in 3, severe intolerable pain with impalpable pulse in 3, and digital gangrene and amputation in 2, one of whom developed an unhealed amputation stump and required a higher amputation level with satisfactory healing of the revised stump. Three patients were treated conservatively, 6 by banding, 4 by ligation, 1 by embolization, and 1 by distal ligation and bypass operation. Clinical characteristics of patients with hand ischemia included long-standing insulin-dependent diabetes (10), chronic hypertension (12), peripheral arterial disease (14; 93.3%), coronary artery disease (8), and systemic lupus erythematosis (1). Severe peripheral arterial diseases are commonly found and may be markers for risk of hand ischemia after access surgery.

Proximal Venous Outflow Obstruction in Patients With Upper Extremity Arteriovenous Dialysis Access

To evaluate the impact of central venous obstruction on upper extremity hemodialysis access failure, we retrospectively analyzed our recent experience in managing this problem. We reviewed 158 upper extremity hemodialysis access procedures performed in 122 patients during a 1-year period. Fourteen (11.5%) patients had central vein obstruction as the cause of severe arm swelling, graft thrombosis, or graft malfunction. All 14 patients had had bilateral temporary subclavian vein dialysis catheters and failed upper extremity arteriovenous access. Seventeen lesions were treated in 14 patients including eight subclavian vein occlusions, six subclavian vein stenoses, two internal jugular vein stenoses, and one superior vena cava stenosis. Twenty-one procedures were performed including 17 percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasties (PTAs) with stent placement in 13, two axillary to innominate vein bypasses, and two axillary to internal jugular vein bypasses. All patients had resolution of symptoms. Thirteen (76%) PTAs were initially successful but in four (24%) cases it was impossible to recanalize the vein. Eight (47%) PTAs provided functional hemodialysis access for 2 to 9 months, two (12%) restenosed at 3 and 10 months and were successfully redilated, two occluded at 2 and 4 months and were unable to be recanalized, and one failed immediately after a successful PTA. Four PTA failures were followed by venous bypass, which remained patent and provided functional access 7 to 13 months after surgery. Of nine stenotic venous lesions six (67%) were successfully dilated without restenosis, whereas of eight occluded veins only two (25%) were successfully treated without recurrence. Temporary central hemodialysis catheters produce a significant number of symptomatic central vein obstructions in patients with upper extremity arteriovenous access.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)