Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research

The Korean Surgical Society (대한외과학회)
권호 표지

Salvage Therapy for a Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Fistula for Hemodialysis

혈액투석을 위한 동정맥루 형성술 후 기능 부전 시 구조 요법

Lee, Chang-Min;Shin, Byung-Seok;Ahn, Moon-Sang
이창민;신병석;안문상

  • Published : 20080500
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Salvage procedures for a dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula (AVF) are defined as operation or percutaneous balloon angioplasty (PTA) for the AVF is inadequate for performing hemodialysis. This retrospective study was performed in order to identify the appropriate salvage treatment modality. Methods: From April 2001 to October 2007, 132 salvage procedures in 100 patients were performed. We analyzed the overall cumulative patency rates of both the procedures and we compared them according to the type of primary AVF and the site and distribution of the stenoses. Results: Fifty eight patients underwent operation, and 74 patients underwent PTA. The initial success rate was 77.59% for operation and 83.78% for PTA. The one year cumulative patency rates of operation and PTA were 46.11% and 21.62%, respectively (P=0.00). For the patients whose AVF had been created using autogenous vein, the one year cumulative patency rates of operation and PTA were 49.72% and 21.15%, respectively (P=0.04). According to the location and distribution of the stenoses, 56 patients (64.4%) with an autogenous AVF had juxta-anastomotic lesion. Among them, 23 patients underwent operation and 33 patients underwent PTA. The 1 year cumulative patency rates for these patients were 66.63% and 12.12%, respectively (P=0.00). For the treatment of the diffuse and multiple stenoses of the autogenous vein, PTA (n=14) showed a better patency rate than that of operation (P=0.00). Conclusion: Salvage therapy for a dysfunctional fistula prolonged their life span. Operation was superior to PTA for a juxta-anastomotic lesion of an autogenous AVF, but PTA had benefit over operation for the cases with diffuse and multiple stenoses.

Keywords

References

  1. Schwab SJ. Vascular access for hemodialysis. Kidney Int 1999;55:2078-90 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.1999.00409.x
  2. NKF-K/DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Vascular Acess: Update 2000. Am J Kidney Dis 2001;37:S137-81 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6386(01)70007-8
  3. Korean Society of Nephrology, Registry Committee. Renal replacement therapy in Korea. J Korean Soc Nephrol 2006;25: S425-57
  4. Min SK, Jung IM, Lee TS, Ha J, Suh KS, Chung JK, et al. Rescue therapy of complicated A-V fistula for hemodialysis. J Korean Soc Vasc Surg 1999;15:111-6
  5. Marston WA, Criado E, Jaques PF, Mauro MA, Burnham SJ, Keagy BA. Prospective randomized comparision of surgical versus endovascular management of thrombosed dialysis access grafts. J Vasc Surg 1997;26:373-81 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0741-5214(97)70030-2
  6. Cho YP, Kwon TW, Sung GB, Kang JY, Kim GE. Treatment of arteriovenous fistula failure: surgical revision versus interventional radiologic procedure. J Korean Surg Soc 1998;55: 274-81
  7. Hingorani A, Ascher E, Kallakuri S, Greenberg S, Khanimov Y. Impact of reintervetion for failing upper-extremity arteriovenous autogenous access for hemodialysis. J Vasc Surg 2001; 34:1004-9 https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.2001.119750
  8. Dougherty MJ, Calligaro KD, Schindler N, Raviola CA, Ntoso A. Endovascular versus surgical treatment for thrombosed hemodialysis grafts: a prospective, randomized study. J Vasc Surg 1999;30:1016-23 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0741-5214(99)70039-X
  9. Turmel-Rodrigues L, Pengloan J, Baudin S, Testou D, Abaza M, Dahdah G, et al. Treatment of stenosis and thrombosis in haemodialysis fistulas and grafts by interventional radiology. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2000;15:2029-36 https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/15.12.2029
  10. Maya ID, Oser R, Saddekni S, Barker J, Allon M. Vascular access stenosis: comparision of arteriovenous grafts and fistulas. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;44:859-65 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6386(04)01085-6
  11. Park GH, Lee SM, Sohn CY, Kim HT, Cho WH. Cases of failed internal arteriovenous fistula and their salvage procedures. J Korean Soc Vasc Surg 1997;13:74-80
  12. Beathard GA. An algorithm for the physical examination of early fistula failure. Semin Dial 2005;18:331-5
  13. McCarley P, Wingard RL, Shyr Y, Pettus W, Hakim RM, Ikizler TA. Vascular access blood flow monitoring reduces access morbidity and costs. Kidney Int 2001;60:1164-72 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.0600031164.x
  14. Kanterman RY, Vesely TM, Pilgram TK, Guy BW, Windus DW, Picus D. Dialysis access grafts: Anatomic location of venous stenosis and results of angioplasty. Radiology 1995;195: 135-9 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.195.1.7892454
  15. Lipari G, Tessitore N, Poli A, Bedogna V, Impedovo A, Lupo A, et al. Outcomes of surgical revision of stenosed and thrombosed forearm arteriovenous fistulae for haemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007;22:2605-12 https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfm239
  16. Murphy GJ, Saunders R, Metcalfe M, Nicholson ML. Elbow fistulas using autogenous vein: patency rates and results of revision. Postgrad Med 2002;78:483-6 https://doi.org/10.1136/pmj.78.922.483
  17. Oakes DD, Sherck JP, Cobb LF. Surgical salvage of failed radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulae: techniques and results in 29 patients. Kidney Int 1998;53:480-7 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1755.1998.00769.x
  18. Achkar K, Nassar GM. Salvage of a severely dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula with a strictured and occluded outflow tract. Semin Dial 2005;18:336-42 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-139X.2005.18409.x