Venous stent versus conventional stent for the treatment of central vein obstruction in hemodialysis patients: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND

Endovascular treatment is a first-line treatment for upper thoracic central vein obstruction (CVO). Few studies using bare venous stents (BVS) in CVO have been conducted.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the treatment performance of upper thoracic central vein stenosis between BVS and conventional bare stent (CBS) in hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

Hemodialysis patients with upper thoracic central vein obstruction who underwent endovascular treatment at the interventional unit of our institution from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2018 were enrolled in the present study. CBS was used to treat central vein obstruction in 43 patients and BVS in 34 patients. We compared the primary patency rates and complications between the two stent types. values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The patient demographic data between the CBS and BVS groups were similar. The characteristics of the lesions, procedures, and complications were not significantly different between the two groups ( > 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences of primary patency rates at three and six months between the BVS and CBS groups (94.1% vs. 86.0% and 73.5% vs. 58.1%, respectively;  > 0.05). The primary patency rate at 12 months in the BVS group was significantly higher than that in the CBS group (61.8% vs. 32.6%;  = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular treatment of central vein obstruction with BVS provided a higher primary patency rate at 12 months than CBS.