These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Outcomes of prosthetic upper arm arteriovenous graft vs brachiobasilic fistula for hemodialysis access.
    Author: Lu E, Baril DT, Arbabi CN, Chou EL, Azizzadeh A, Gupta N.
    Journal: J Vasc Surg; 2024 Oct; 80(4):1083-1089.e2. PubMed ID: 38909916.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Primary arteriovenous access such as radiocephalic and brachiocephalic fistulas are initial choices for creating vascular access in dialysis patients. When neither of these choices is an option, upper arm arteriovenous graft or brachiobasilic transposition is recommended. Although primary fistula is better than prosthetic graft for suitable patients, there is little data to guide the best treatment strategy in the absence of suitable vein for primary access creation. This study identifies factors that influence patency rates and compares outcomes of patients treated with brachiobasilic fistula vs upper arm graft in patients who have failed forearm access or are not candidates for primary access. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients with dialysis-dependent renal failure from 2010 to 2022 was analyzed. Primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency rates were calculated. Incidence rates of complications and reinterventions were compared. RESULTS: There were 148 patients with brachiobasilic fistulas and 157 patients with upper arm grafts. The graft group was older (70.1 ± 14.7 vs 62.5 ± 14.6 years; P = .003) and had a higher incidence of pacemakers (11.9% vs 4.1%; P = .005). Brachiobasilic fistulas had higher 6-month (77.0% vs 64.3%; P = .02) and 1-year (68.2% vs 55.4%; P = .03) primary-assisted patency. Secondary patency rates were better for upper arm grafts at 1-year (82.2% vs 72.3%; P = .05). Access complications of non-maturation and aneurysm were higher in basilic vein transposition (21.6% vs 1.3%; P < .0001; 15.5% vs 6.4%; P = .017). Grafts had higher rates of occlusion (58.0% vs 25.7%; P < .0001). In terms of interventions, upper arm grafts had higher rates of thrombectomy (50.3% vs 18.9%; P < .0001), but there was no difference seen in angioplasty, stent, surgical revision, or steal procedures. Basilic vein transpositions had longer time to cannulation (104.6 ± 81.1 vs 32.5 ± 22.4 days; P < .0001), longer total catheter days (251.1 ± 181.7 vs 72.9 ± 56.3 days; P < .0001), and higher number of procedures to aid maturity (0.7 ± 0.7 vs 0.1 ± 0.3; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, when forearm access or primary arteriovenous access is not an option, basilic vein transposition and upper arm grafts have fairly equivalent primary patency. Primary assisted patency is slightly better in basilic vein fistulas, but secondary patency is better in upper arm grafts at 1 year. Basilic fistulas also had longer time to cannulation, longer total catheter days, and more procedures to aid maturity.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]