Division of Vascular Surgery, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Sentara Vascular Specialists, Norfolk, VA, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Mar;57(3):776-83; discussion 782-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.09.040. Epub 2013 Jan 11.
The Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow (HeRO) graft is becoming a recognized alternative to lower extremity arteriovenous grafts (LEAVGs) as an option for patients who have exhausted traditional upper extremity access; however, which should be applied preferentially is unclear.
A retrospective review of LEAVG and HeRO implants from January 2004 to August 2010 was performed. Patient demographics, medical history, procedural data, and outcomes were evaluated.
Within the time periods, 60 HeROs were placed in 59 patients and 22 LEAVGs were placed in 21 patients. Demographics were similar between the two groups for many factors; however, the patients who underwent HeRO placement had significantly higher body mass index compared with the LEAVG group. Mean follow-up was 13.9 months for the HeRO group and 11.9 months for the LEAVG group. The HeRO patients underwent a mean of 6.3 previous tunneled dialysis catheter insertions and 3.1 previous AVG/arteriovenous fistula placements. The LEAVG patients underwent placement of a mean of 4.1 previous tunneled dialysis catheters and 2.6 previous AVG/arteriovenous fistulas. The principal difference was the number of interventions to maintain patency, which was 2.21 per year in the HeRO group and 1.17 per year in the AVG group (P = .003) Secondary patency at 6 months was 77% for the HeRO patients and 83% for the LEAVG patients (P = .14). The HeRO and LEAVG groups had no difference in infection rate per 1000 days (0.61 vs 0.71; P = .77) or mortality rate (22% vs 19% respectively; P = .22) at 6 months.
In access challenged patients, LEAVG and HeRO offer similar rates of secondary patency, infection, and all-cause mortality. The LEAVG required fewer interventions to maintain patency, and the HeRO maintains the benefit of utilizing the upper extremity site of venous drainage. In our practice, we prefer the HeRO to LEAVG, especially in patients with peripheral arterial disease and in the obese population, because it preserves lower extremity access options.
血液透析可靠流出(HeRO)移植物正成为下肢动静脉移植物(LEAVG)的一种替代选择,适用于已用尽传统上肢通路的患者;然而,哪种方法更优先应用尚不清楚。
对 2004 年 1 月至 2010 年 8 月的 LEAVG 和 HeRO 植入物进行回顾性分析。评估患者的人口统计学、病史、手术数据和结局。
在研究期间,59 例患者中植入了 60 个 HeRO,21 例患者中植入了 22 个 LEAVG。两组患者在许多因素上的人口统计学特征相似;然而,接受 HeRO 植入的患者的体重指数明显高于 LEAVG 组。HeRO 组的平均随访时间为 13.9 个月,LEAVG 组为 11.9 个月。HeRO 患者平均接受过 6.3 次经皮隧道透析导管插入术和 3.1 次 AVG/动静脉瘘放置术。LEAVG 患者平均接受过 4.1 次经皮隧道透析导管插入术和 2.6 次 AVG/动静脉瘘放置术。主要区别在于维持通畅所需的干预次数,HeRO 组为每年 2.21 次,AVG 组为每年 1.17 次(P=0.003)。HeRO 患者的 6 个月次级通畅率为 77%,LEAVG 患者为 83%(P=0.14)。HeRO 和 LEAVG 组在每 1000 天的感染率(0.61 与 0.71;P=0.77)或 6 个月死亡率(22%与 19%;P=0.22)方面无差异。
在通路受限的患者中,LEAVG 和 HeRO 的次级通畅率、感染率和全因死亡率相似。LEAVG 维持通畅所需的干预次数较少,而 HeRO 保留了利用静脉引流上肢部位的优势。在我们的实践中,我们更喜欢 HeRO 而不是 LEAVG,尤其是在患有外周动脉疾病和肥胖人群中,因为它保留了下肢通路的选择。