Zivkovic Mia, Partovi Sasan, Kirksey Levester, Levitin Abraham, Lyden Sean P, Quatromoni Jon G, Cohen Israel, Gilat Efrat Keren, Kovach Cassandra, Ghibes Patrick, Raskin Daniel
Interventional Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Vascular Surgery, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2025 Sep 3;121:587-594. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2025.08.034.
As a two-dimensional modality, venography has limitations in its capacity to measure lumen caliber and to assess stenotic disease accurately. This has implications in the management of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients "no-option" candidates access for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) or graft (AVG) creation secondary to high risk of vascular access failure. The incremental diagnostic and clinical impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was quantified in this tunneled dialysis catheter-dependent ESRD cohort.
From January 2024 to February 2025, 14 consecutive "high risk for dialysis circuit vascular access failure" ESRD patients (mean age 56 ± 13 years; 8 male) underwent same-session venography and IVUS. For each interrogated vein, IVUS and venography were compared regarding stenosis grade, venous wall pathology (chronic thrombus, elastic recoil, trabeculae/web formation), and patent central venous outflow. Primary endpoints were IVUS-venography discordance and subsequent change in patient management based on the combined IVUS-venography results. Secondary end points included successful surgical vascular access creation, access maturation at 3-6 months, contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, and procedure-related morbidity.
IVUS was discordant with venography in 7/14 patients (50%): stenosis severity was upgraded in 4 (29%) and downgraded in 3 (21%) based on findings in IVUS. IVUS revealed or confirmed appropriate venous outflow for future vascular access creation in 5/14 patients (36%). Eight of the 14 patients (57%) ultimately underwent AVF/AVG creation after IVUS-guided central venous mapping. At 6 months, 5/8 accesses (63%) were functional for dialysis (4 fistulas, 1 graft). Two accesses (25%) had not been used at the time of analysis, and one fistula (12%) was ligated secondary to infectious complications. Median contrast volume was 51 mL (range 25-127) and median fluoroscopy time was 7.6 min (range 3.0-20.3). No intraprocedural complications during dedicated central venous mapping occurred, and specifically no complications related to IVUS usage were recorded. Two delayed complications occurred in patients who received vascular access as a result of IVUS assessment, and both were managed successfully with endovascular procedures.
In no-option ESRD patients, IVUS revealed changes in stenosis severity in half of the cases compared to standard two-dimensional venography, resulting in permanent dialysis circuit vascular access creation in more than half of the assessed patients, with 63% of these patients reaching vascular access maturation. Routine incorporation of IVUS into salvage central venous mapping may expand durable vascular access options and reduce dialysis catheter dependency.
作为一种二维检查方式,静脉造影在测量管腔内径和准确评估狭窄性疾病方面存在局限性。这对终末期肾病(ESRD)患者的管理具有重要意义,这些患者因血管通路失败风险高,是动静脉内瘘(AVF)或移植物(AVG)创建的“无选择”候选人。在这个依赖隧道透析导管的ESRD队列中,对血管内超声(IVUS)增加的诊断和临床影响进行了量化。
从2024年1月至2025年2月,连续14例“透析回路血管通路失败高风险”的ESRD患者(平均年龄56±13岁;8例男性)接受了同期静脉造影和IVUS检查。对于每条被检查的静脉,比较IVUS和静脉造影在狭窄分级、静脉壁病理(慢性血栓、弹性回缩、小梁/网形成)和中心静脉流出道通畅情况方面的差异。主要终点是IVUS与静脉造影结果不一致以及基于IVUS和静脉造影联合结果的患者管理随后的变化。次要终点包括成功创建手术血管通路、3至6个月时通路成熟情况、造影剂用量、透视时间以及与手术相关的发病率。
14例患者中有7例(50%)IVUS与静脉造影结果不一致:根据IVUS检查结果,4例(29%)狭窄严重程度升级,3例(21%)降级。IVUS显示或确认5/14例患者(36%)有适合未来创建血管通路的静脉流出道。14例患者中有8例(57%)最终在IVUS引导下进行中心静脉测绘后接受了AVF/AVG创建。6个月时,8个通路中有5个(63%)可用于透析(4个内瘘,1个移植物)。分析时,2个通路(25%)未被使用,1个内瘘(12%)因感染并发症而结扎。造影剂用量中位数为51 mL(范围25 - 127),透视时间中位数为7.6分钟(范围3.0 - 20.3)。在专门的中心静脉测绘过程中未发生术中并发症,特别是未记录到与IVUS使用相关的并发症。2例因IVUS评估而接受血管通路的患者出现了延迟并发症,均通过血管内介入治疗成功处理。
在无选择的ESRD患者中,与标准二维静脉造影相比,IVUS在一半的病例中显示狭窄严重程度有变化,导致超过一半的评估患者创建了永久性透析回路血管通路,其中63%的患者血管通路成熟。将IVUS常规纳入挽救性中心静脉测绘可能会扩大持久血管通路选择并减少对透析导管的依赖。