Vowels Travis J, Mohamed Ahmed, Bennett Matthew E, Peden Eric K
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Methodist DeBakey Heart & Vascular Center, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
J Vasc Access. 2020 Mar;21(2):186-194. doi: 10.1177/1129729819867518. Epub 2019 Aug 4.
In complex dialysis patients, central venous stenosis may preclude additional upper extremity access options. The Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow graft (Merit Medical Systems, Inc.) can bypass this stenosis providing patients with an additional upper extremity long-term access option. We report our experience with early-cannulation Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts and compare them to traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts.
We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow graft placement from 1 January 2013 through 15 August 2017 at our institution and compared those undergoing placement of traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts and simultaneous tunneled dialysis catheter insertion to those undergoing Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow graft placement using an early-cannulation Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow graft without a tunneled dialysis catheter.
A total of 88 patients had 98 Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts inserted throughout this time period. Of these, 61 (62%) were early-cannulation Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts, while 37 (38%) were traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts. Primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency rates at 1 year were higher for the traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow graft cohort (53.1% vs 25.2%, p < 0.01; 70.1% vs 30.5%, p < 0.01; and 80.4% vs 55.4%, p = 0.07, respectively). There was no difference in the rate of postoperative hematoma, seroma, pseudoaneurysm formation, steal syndrome, or overall graft thrombosis between the two cohorts. Early-cannulation Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts required earlier reintervention for thrombosis and earlier reintervention for any cause when compared to traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts (146 ± 184 days vs 417 ± 272 days, p < 0.01, and 123 ± 169 days vs 401 ± 311 days, p < 0.01, respectively).
In complex dialysis patients, early-cannulation Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts have significantly lower 1-year primary and primary-assisted patency rates and require earlier reintervention to maintain this patency compared to traditional Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow grafts.
在复杂的透析患者中,中心静脉狭窄可能会排除额外的上肢血管通路选择。血液透析可靠流出道移植物(美瑞泰科医疗系统公司)可以绕过这种狭窄,为患者提供另一种上肢长期血管通路选择。我们报告我们使用早期插管血液透析可靠流出道移植物的经验,并将其与传统的血液透析可靠流出道移植物进行比较。
我们回顾性分析了2013年1月1日至2017年8月15日在我们机构接受血液透析可靠流出道移植物置入的所有患者,并将接受传统血液透析可靠流出道移植物置入并同时插入隧道式透析导管的患者与使用无隧道式透析导管的早期插管血液透析可靠流出道移植物进行血液透析可靠流出道移植物置入的患者进行比较。
在此期间,共有88例患者置入了98个血液透析可靠流出道移植物。其中,61个(62%)是早期插管血液透析可靠流出道移植物,而37个(38%)是传统血液透析可靠流出道移植物。传统血液透析可靠流出道移植物队列1年时的初次通畅率、初次辅助通畅率和二次通畅率更高(分别为53.1%对25.2%,p<0.01;70.1%对30.5%,p<0.01;80.4%对55.4%,p=0.07)。两组队列在术后血肿、血清肿、假性动脉瘤形成、窃血综合征或总体移植物血栓形成的发生率上没有差异。与传统血液透析可靠流出道移植物相比,早期插管血液透析可靠流出道移植物因血栓形成需要更早进行再次干预,因任何原因进行再次干预也更早(分别为146±184天对417±272天,p<0.01,以及123±169天对401±311天,p<0.01)。
在复杂的透析患者中,与传统血液透析可靠流出道移植物相比,早期插管血液透析可靠流出道移植物1年时的初次和初次辅助通畅率显著更低,并且需要更早进行再次干预以维持这种通畅。