Dataset Information

Endovascular versus surgical creation of arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to perform cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses comparing endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation to surgical arteriovenous fistula creation in hemodialysis patients from the National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective in Italy.

Methods

A systematic literature review has been conducted to retrieve complications' rates after arteriovenous fistula creation procedures. One study comparing endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation, performed with WavelinQ device, to the surgical approach through propensity score matching was preferred to single-arm investigations to execute the economic evaluations. This study was chosen to populate a Markov model to project, on a time horizon of 1 year, quality adjusted life years and costs associated with endovascular arteriovenous fistula (WavelinQ) and surgical arteriovenous fistula options for both cohorts of incident and prevalent hemodialysis patients.

Results

For both incident and prevalent hemodialysis patients, endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation, performed with WavelinQ, was the dominant strategy over surgical arteriovenous fistula approach, showing less cost and better patients' quality of life. Compared to the current scenario, progressively increasing utilization rates of WavelinQ over surgical arteriovenous fistula creation in the next 5 years in incident hemodialysis patients are expected to save globally 30-36 million euros to the NHS.

Conclusion

Endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation performed with WavelinQ could be a cost-saving strategy in comparison with the surgical approach for patients in hemodialysis. Future studies comparing different devices for endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation versus the surgical option would be needed to confirm or reject the validity of this preliminary evaluation. In the meantime, decision-makers can use these results to take decisions on the diffusion of endovascular procedures in Italy.

SUBMITTER: Rognoni C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7897778 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Endovascular versus surgical creation of arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses.

Rognoni Carla C Tozzi Matteo M Tarricone Rosanna R

The journal of vascular access 20200519 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of the present study was to perform cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses comparing endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation to surgical arteriovenous fistula creation in hemodialysis patients from the National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective in Italy.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic literature review has been conducted to retrieve complications' rates after arteriovenous fistula creation procedures. One study comparing endovascular arteriovenous fistula cr ...[more]

PMID: 32425096

Similar Datasets

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: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:BackgroundRegional anesthesia improves short-term blood flow through arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs). We previously demonstrated that, compared with local anesthesia, regional anesthesia improves primary AVF patency at 3 months.MethodsTo study the effects of regional versus local anesthesia on longer-term AVF patency, we performed an observer-blinded randomized controlled trial at three university hospitals in Glasgow, United Kingdom. We randomly assigned 126 patients undergoing primary radiocephalic or brachiocephalic AVF creation to receive regional anesthesia (brachial plexus block; 0.5% L-bupivacaine and 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine) or local anesthesia (0.5% L-bupivacaine and 1% lidocaine). This report includes findings on primary, functional, and secondary patency at 12 months; reinterventions; and additional access procedures (primary outcome measures were previously reported). We analyzed data by intention to treat, and also performed cost-effectiveness analyses.ResultsAt 12 months, we found higher primary patency among patients receiving regional versus local anesthesia (50 of 63 [79%] versus 37 of 63 [59%] patients; odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.6 to 3.8; P=0.02) as well as higher functional patency (43 of 63 [68%] versus 31 of 63 [49%] patients; OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.7; P=0.008). In 12 months, 21 revisional procedures, 53 new AVFs, and 50 temporary dialysis catheters were required. Regional anesthesia resulted in net savings of £195.10 (US$237.36) per patient at 1 year, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately £12,900 (US$15,694.20) per quality-adjusted life years over a 5-year time horizon. Results were robust after extensive sensitivity and scenario analyses.ConclusionsCompared with local anesthesia, regional anesthesia significantly improved both primary and functional AVF patency at 1 year and is cost-effective.Clinical trial registry name and registration numberLocal Anaesthesia versus Regional Block for Arteriovenous Fistulae, NCT01706354.

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.

Dataset Information

Endovascular versus surgical creation of arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Endovascular versus surgical creation of arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets