Planken R Nils, Keuter Xavier H A, Hoeks Arnold P G, Kooman Jeroen P, van der Sande Frank M, Kessels Alfons G H, Leiner Tim, Tordoir Jan H M
Department of Vascular Surgery, Maastricht University Hospital, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006 Mar;21(3):802-6. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfi340. Epub 2005 Dec 19.
Preoperative assessment of forearm superficial venous diameter may predict early failure of newly created arteriovenous fistulas for haemodialysis access. However, early failure and non-maturation rates remain high (up to 30%) and reported cut-off diameters are inconsistent. We hypothesize that this inconsistency is due to differences in the methods used to achieve venous dilatation prior to diameter measurements and daily variation in superficial venous diameter. We furthermore hypothesize that the use of a cuff will lead to a better inter-observer agreement since the applied pressure can be precisely determined. The purpose of this study was to determine inter-observer agreement of superficial venous diameter measurement under venous congestion by using either a graduated pressure cuff or tourniquet and furthermore, to determine daily variations in superficial venous diameter.
Diameter measurements were performed by two observers on days 1 and 3, in 21 end-stage renal disease patients using either a cuff (60 mmHg) or tourniquet. Measurements were carried out in random order and observers were blinded for each other's results. Inter-observer agreement was expressed as interclass correlation coefficients. Variance components analysis was used to determine possible causes of disagreement.
Using a cuff, mean venous diameter was 1.8 mm (range, 0.7-3.3 mm). When a tourniquet was used, the mean diameter was 1.8 mm (range, 0.6-3.2 mm). Interclass correlation coefficients between observers were 0.76 and 0.74 for the use of a cuff and tourniquet, respectively. Diameter measurements were revealed to be observer independent. Variations in venous diameter were determined by the patient and the interaction of patient and day. Repeated assessment of venous diameter on different days revealed a variation coefficient of 26.4% when using a cuff, and 26.5% when using a tourniquet.
Venous diameter assessment is observer and congestion method independent. Daily variations in forearm superficial venous diameters should be taken into account when defining and using cut-off diameters prior to vascular access surgery.
术前评估前臂浅静脉直径可能预测用于血液透析通路的新建动静脉内瘘的早期失败。然而,早期失败率和未成熟率仍然很高(高达30%),且报道的临界直径并不一致。我们推测这种不一致是由于直径测量前实现静脉扩张的方法不同以及浅静脉直径的每日变化所致。我们还推测使用袖带会导致更好的观察者间一致性,因为施加的压力可以精确确定。本研究的目的是确定使用刻度压力袖带或止血带在静脉充血情况下测量浅静脉直径的观察者间一致性,此外,确定浅静脉直径的每日变化。
21例终末期肾病患者在第1天和第3天由两名观察者使用袖带(60 mmHg)或止血带进行直径测量。测量按随机顺序进行,观察者对彼此的结果不知情。观察者间一致性用组内相关系数表示。方差成分分析用于确定不一致的可能原因。
使用袖带时,平均静脉直径为1.8 mm(范围0.7 - 3.3 mm)。使用止血带时,平均直径为1.8 mm(范围0.6 - 3.2 mm)。使用袖带和止血带时观察者间的组内相关系数分别为0.76和0.74。直径测量显示与观察者无关。静脉直径的变化由患者以及患者与日期的相互作用决定。在不同日期重复评估静脉直径发现,使用袖带时变异系数为26.4%,使用止血带时为26.5%。
静脉直径评估与观察者和充血方法无关。在血管通路手术前定义和使用临界直径时,应考虑前臂浅静脉直径的每日变化。