Drouven Johannes W, Fernhout Meine H, de Bruin Cor, van Roon Arie M, Bokkers Reinoud Ph, Zeebregts Clark J
Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J Vasc Access. 2025 Jan;26(1):258-264. doi: 10.1177/11297298231214101. Epub 2023 Nov 23.
There is growing evidence that type of anesthesia can significantly change vascular access surgery outcomes. Still, there is limited evidence on the impact of regional anesthesia (RA) on patency and failure rates compared to general anesthesia (GA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of RA and GA in patients who underwent vascular access creation at our center.
Data collected in our prospectively maintained database of patients with chronic renal dysfunction requiring hemodialysis were analyzed, 464 patients were included. Outcome parameters such as maturation, primary failure, postoperative flow measurements, patency rates, and survival outcomes were compared between RA and GA groups.
In this study 489 vascular access procedures were performed in 464 patients, 318 included in the RA group and 171 in the GA group. Median follow-up time was 29.9 (IQR 37.3) months in the RA group versus 33.0 (IQR 40.7) in the GA group ( = 0.252). Anesthesia type did not significantly affect patient survival (HR, 1.01; CI, 0.70-1.45; = 0.976). No significant differences were found in vascular access flow volume, primary failure, or time to cannulation between the RA and GA groups for both radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulae and brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulae. Anesthesia type did not significantly change patency outcomes.
Based on our results, both RA and GA demonstrate similar results regarding patient survival, maturation, failure, or patency after vascular access creation. Still, patient-specific factors for each type of anesthesia as well as patient preference should be considered.
越来越多的证据表明麻醉类型可显著改变血管通路手术的结果。然而,与全身麻醉(GA)相比,关于区域麻醉(RA)对通畅率和失败率影响的证据有限。本研究的目的是比较在我们中心接受血管通路建立的患者中RA和GA的效果。
分析了前瞻性维护的慢性肾功能不全需要血液透析患者数据库中收集的数据,纳入了464例患者。比较了RA组和GA组之间的成熟度、原发性失败、术后流量测量、通畅率和生存结果等结局参数。
本研究中464例患者共进行了489次血管通路手术,RA组318例,GA组171例。RA组的中位随访时间为29.9(IQR 37.3)个月,而GA组为33.0(IQR 40.7)个月(P = 0.252)。麻醉类型对患者生存率无显著影响(HR,1.01;CI,0.70 - 1.45;P = 0.976)。对于桡动脉头静脉内瘘和头臂动静脉内瘘,RA组和GA组在血管通路血流量、原发性失败或穿刺时间方面均未发现显著差异。麻醉类型未显著改变通畅结果。
根据我们的结果,RA和GA在血管通路建立后的患者生存、成熟度、失败率或通畅率方面显示出相似的结果。然而,仍应考虑每种麻醉类型的患者特异性因素以及患者偏好。