Dataset Information

Preoperative assessment for percutaneous and open surgical arteriovenous fistula creation in patients for haemodialysis.

ABSTRACT: Preoperative assessment prior to surgical arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) including ultrasound-guided mapping has been shown to have beneficial effects on their immediate success as well as early outcomes. This has led to their wide acceptance and adoption however clinical practice criteria is variable and is reflected in variabilities in practice. When transposing this to percutaneously created endovascular AVFs (endoAVFs), variable preoperative assessment criteria could equally result in variable practice and potentially subsequent and expectant outcomes. We aimed to review literature on reported validated methodologies and workflows of preoperative assessment for surgical AVF creation as reported in highest levels of available evidence, specifically randomized controlled trials. Published practice recommendations and guidelines on best clinical practice as well as systematic reviews and meta-analyses of published studies were also reviewed. Data on practice methodology from identified trial publications and protocols was collated and a summative narrative synthesis was carried out which compared these methodologies to additional assessments that may be required when targeting assessment for percutaneous endoAVF formation, based on our units experience as part of an international multicentre trial. In this review we present a brief overview of published literature and guidelines and propose a unified and uniform workflow for preoperative assessment for surgical AVFs and endoAVFs to aide clinical and imaging practice.

SUBMITTER: Khawaja AZ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7857810 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveSurgical creation of arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) and grafts (AVG) continues to be the mainstay access for hemodialysis (HD). Avoidance of dependence on dialysis catheters continues to be a worldwide mission in dialysis access. Importantly, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to hemodialysis access and each patient should undergo access creation that is patient-centered. The aim of this paper is to review the literature, current guidelines, and discuss the common types of upper extremity hemodialysis access and their reported outcomes. We will also share our institutional experience regarding the surgical creation of upper extremity hemodialysis access.MethodsThe literature review incorporates twenty-seven relevant articles from 1997 to present and one case report series from 1966. Sources were gathered from electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Google Scholar. Only articles written in the English language were considered and study designs varied from current clinical guidelines, systematic and meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and two main vascular surgery textbooks.Key content and findingsThis review exclusively focuses on the surgical creation of upper extremity hemodialysis accesses. Creating a graft versus fistula ultimately is decided by the existing anatomy, and is centered around the need of the patient. Preoperatively, the patient should undergo a thorough history and physical exam, with special attention to any previous central venous access, as well as, delineating the vascular anatomy with ultrasound imaging. The major tenets of access creation are choosing the most distal site of the non-dominant upper extremity whenever possible; and ideally creation of an autogenous access is preferred over a prosthetic graft. Described in this review are multiple surgical approaches for upper extremity hemodialysis access creation and associated institutional practices performed by the surgeon author. In the postoperative period, follow up care and surveillance are imperative to preserve a functioning access.ConclusionsThe most recent guidelines regarding hemodialysis access still favor arteriovenous fistula as the primary goal for patients with suitable anatomy. Preoperative evaluation including patient education, intraoperative ultrasound assessment, meticulous technique, and careful postoperative management are all paramount for successful access surgery. Dialysis access remains quite challenging, but with diligence the great majority of patients can be dialyzed without catheter dependence.

Project description:An endovascular arteriovenous fistula is a recent technological advancement in hemodialysis vascular access. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of endovascular arteriovenous fistula (eAVF) creation compared with surgical arteriovenous fistula (sAVF) creation among patients with chronic kidney disease. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Clinical Trials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform until May 2021 to perform meta-analyses using random-effects models. Pre-specified primary outcomes were fistula maturation, procedure-related complications, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were procedural technical success, procedure time, all adverse events, and medical expenditure. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of the interventions assessment tool, and the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were used to assess the quality of individual studies and the body of evidence, respectively. In seven studies including 860 patients, endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation had little to no effect on fistula maturation (odds ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence intervals, 0.05 to 6.91). Meta-analysis could not be performed for procedure-related complications and patient satisfaction due to insufficient data. For secondary outcomes, endovascular arteriovenous fistula resulted in a slight to no difference in procedural technical success (odds ratio, 0.69: 95% confidence intervals, 0.04 to 11.98) and all adverse events (odds ratio, 6.31; 95% confidence intervals, 0.64 to 62.22). Endovascular fistula creation incurred less medical expenditure than sAVF (mean difference, USD 12760; 95% confidence intervals, -19710 to -5820). Meta-analysis for procedure time was not performed because one of the studies had a critical risk of bias. All of these outcomes were of low certainty of evidence or very low certainty of evidence. There was limited evidence for supporting endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation over conventional surgical arteriovenous fistula creation for patients with chronic kidney disease. Multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of eAVFs in selected populations.

Project description:Current guidelines suggest that arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is associated with survival advantage over arteriovenous graft (AVG). However, AVFs often require months to become functional, increasing tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) use, which can erode the benefit of an AVF. We sought to compare survival in patients with end-stage renal disease after creation of an AVF or AVG in patients starting hemodialysis (HD) with a TDC and to identify patient populations that may benefit from preferential use of AVG over AVF.Using U.S. Renal Data System databases, we identified incident HD patients in 2005 through 2008 and observed them through 2008. Initial access type and clinical variables including albumin levels were assessed using U.S. Renal Data System data collection forms. Attempts at AVF and AVG creation in patients who started HD through a TDC were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. We accounted for the effect of changes in access type by truncating follow-up when an additional AVF or AVG was performed. Survival curves were then constructed, and log-rank tests were used for pairwise survival comparisons, stratified by age. Multivariate analysis was performed with Cox proportional hazards regressions; variables were chosen using stepwise elimination. An interaction of access type and albumin level was detected, and Cox models using differing thresholds for albumin level were constructed. The primary outcome was survival.Among the 138,245 patients who started with a TDC and had complete records amenable for analysis, 22.8% underwent AVF creation (mean age ± standard deviation, 68.9 ± 12.5 years; 27.8% mortality at 1 year) and 7.6% underwent AVG placement (70.2 ± 12.0 years; 28.2% mortality) within 3 months of HD initiation; 69.6% remained with a TDC (63.2 ± 15.4 years; 33.8% mortality). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression, AVF creation is equivalent to AVG placement in terms of survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.02; P = .349). AVG placement is superior to continued TDC use (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.48-1.61; P < .001). In patients older than 80 years with albumin levels >4.0 g/dL, AVF creation is associated with higher mortality hazard compared with AVG creation (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.04-1.43; P = .013).For patients who start HD through a TDC, placement of an AVF and AVG is associated with similar mortality hazard. Further study is necessary to determine the ideal access for patients in whom the survival advantage of an AVF over an AVG is uncertain.

Project description:To assess the anatomic development of native arteriovenous fistula (AVF) during the first 6 weeks after creation by using ultrasonographic (US) measurements in a multicenter hemodialysis fistula maturation study.Each institutional review board approved the prospective study protocol, and written informed consent was obtained. Six hundred and two participants (180 women and 422 men, 459 with upper-arm AVF and 143 with forearm AVF) from seven clinical centers underwent preoperative artery and vein US mapping. AVF draining vein diameter and blood flow rate were assessed postoperatively after 1 day, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks. Relationships among US measurements were summarized after using multiple imputation for missing measurements.In 55% of forearm AVFs (68 of 124) and 83% of upper-arm AVFs (341 of 411) in surviving patients without thrombosis or AVF intervention prior to 6 weeks, at least 50% of their 6-week blood flow rate measurement was achieved at 1 day. Among surviving patients without thrombosis or AVF intervention prior to week 2, 70% with upper-arm AVFs (302 of 433) and 77% with forearm AVFs (99 of 128) maintained at least 85% of their week 2 flow rate at week 6. Mean AVF diameters of at least 0.40 cm were seen in 85% (389 of 459), 91% (419 of 459), and 87% (401 of 459) of upper-arm AVFs and in 40% (58 of 143), 73% (104 of 143), and 77% (110 of 143) of forearm AVFs at 1 day, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks, respectively. One-day and 2-week AVF flow rates and diameters were used to predict 6-week levels, with 2-week prediction of 6-week measures more accurate than those of 1 day (flow rates, R(2) = 0.47 and 0.61, respectively; diameters, R(2) = 0.49 and 0.82, respectively).AVF blood flow rate at 1 day is usually more than 50% of the 6-week blood flow rate. Two-week measurements are more predictive of 6-week diameter and blood flow than those of 1 day. US measurements at 2 weeks may be of value in the early identification of fistulas that are unlikely to develop optimally.

Dataset Information

Preoperative assessment for percutaneous and open surgical arteriovenous fistula creation in patients for haemodialysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets