A comparison of brachial artery-brachial vein arteriovenous fistulas with arteriovenous grafts in patients with poor superficial venous anatomy

Impact of arteriovenous fistulas versus arteriovenous grafts on vascular access performance in haemodialysis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the best-performing vascular access type for patients undergoing haemodialysis. We aimed to compare outcomes of starting dialysis on arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) versus arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) in haemodialysis patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of multiple electronic information sources and bibliographic reference lists. The following outcome parameters were evaluated at 1, 2 and 5 years: primary failure, defined as access never used for dialysis; primary patency, defined as intervention-free access survival; primary-assisted patency, defined as uninterrupted access survival with interventions; and secondary patency, defined as cumulative access survival.

RESULTS

We identified 15 comparative studies reporting a total of 118,434 patients who initiated haemodialysis with AVF (n = 95,143) or AVG (n = 23,291). Our analysis demonstrated that AVF was associated with significantly higher primary failure rate (OR: 2.05, p = .0005) but significantly higher rate of primary patency at 1 year (OR: 1.91, p < .00001), at 2 years (OR: 2.52, p < .00001) and at 5 years (OR: 2.59, p < .00001); and primary-assisted patency at 1 year (OR: 1.71, p < .00001), at 2 years (OR: 2.13, p < .00001) and 5 years (OR: 2.79, p < .00001). There was no significant difference in secondary patency at 1 year (OR: 1.08, p < .00001) but AVF had better secondary patency at 2 years (OR: 1.26, p < .00001) and 5 years (OR: 1.60, p < .00001) than AVG.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis of best available comparative evidence (Level 2) demonstrated that AVFs may be associated with significantly higher primary failure rate but higher primary patency, primary-assisted patency and secondary patency at 1, 2 and 5 years compared to AVGs. However, the available evidence is subject to significant selection bias and confounding by indication.

Comparison between autogenous brachial-brachial upper-arm elevated direct arteriovenous fistulas and prosthetic brachial-antecubital indirect forearm arteriovenous grafts

OBJECTIVES

The National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-KDOQI) guidelines recommend forearm arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) as an alternative procedure to transposed basilic vein fistulas for providing secondary access during hemodialysis. Recently, autogenous elevated brachial-brachial vein fistulas (BVE) have become increasingly popular. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of BVE and forearm loop AVG (AVG) for secondary access in hemodialysis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who had received a BVE or forearm AVG at a single center from January 2015 to April 2019. In total, 19 BVE were created via two-stage operations and two via a one-stage operation; 53 forearm AVG's were performed.

RESULTS

The AVG group was twice as likely to suffer loss of primary patency compared with the BVE group (odds ratio [OR], 2.666; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.108-6.412; p = 0.029) per the multivariate analysis. The primary patency and primary assisted patency of the BVE group were superior those of the AVG group, except for secondary patency (p = 0.02, p = 0.07, p = 0.879, respectively). In subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in primary, primary assisted, or secondary patency between AVG and BVE when brachial vein was used for AVG outflow. In addition, no significant differences were noted regarding the infection rate (12.5% vs 12.3%, p = 0.331, severity >0), postoperative bleeding rate (14.5% vs 3.5%, p = 0.191, severity >1), early thrombus rate (0.0% vs 10.5%, p = 0.122), and early failure rate (7% vs 4.8%, p = 0.591).

CONCLUSIONS

The primary patency and primary assisted patency rates of BVE were significantly better than those observed in AVGs, but the complication rates were similar. The appropriate procedure to provide vascular access should be determined by the individual patient's condition and the surgical skill of the operating surgeon.

Forearm brachial artery to brachial vein looped arteriovenous grafts: A single center, single surgeon observational study

BACKGROUND

Long-term hemodialysis (HD) treatment requires the establishment of a cannulatable vascular access (VA) point. While the arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is considered the gold standard, the arteriovenous graft (AVG) is a viable alternative especially in patients with poor superficial venous anatomy. Few studies have assessed the efficacy of the brachial-brachial arteriovenous graft (BB-AVG) for long-term HD access. By analyzing one surgeon's experience in creating, surveilling and maintaining BB-AVGs, this retrospective study aims to add to the body of literature in assessing patency outcomes of BB-AVGs.

METHODS

We identified 57 BB-AVGs that met inclusion criteria and were created between October 6, 2005 and May 1, 2019 by a single surgeon in 54 patients. We analyzed primary failures, patency, complications and interventions. Patency rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The incidence of complications and interventions were expressed as number of events per person-year.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients (median age of 65 years) were analyzed. Primary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 20.4% 7.4%, and 5.0%. Primary assisted patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 46.7%, 33.5%, and 15.1%. The secondary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 81.8%, 63.8%, and 60.1%, respectively. The incidence of complications and interventions was 2.164 per person-year. Most complications and interventions were due to stenosis (1.202 per person-year) or thrombosis (0.802 per person-year).

CONCLUSION

In patients with poor superficial veins, the brachial vein is a reasonable alternative to use as the venous outflow. However, in order to achieve acceptable patency rates, close monitoring of the VA, as well as aggressive treatment of complications within the brachial vein is necessary. Overall, the BB-AVG should be considered in patients who lack adequate superficial veins and require preservation of the more proximal veins.

Monitoring the Patient Following Radio-Cephalic Arteriovenous Fistula Creation: Current Perspectives

Autogenous radial–cephalic direct wrist arteriovenous fistula (RC-AVF) in the non-dominant arm is the gold standard for dialysis vascular access. However, the RC-AVF non-maturation rate is significant (≃ 40%) due to an increasingly elderly and comorbid population incidence. A detailed identification of the biological cascade underlying arteriovenous fistula (AVF) maturation could be the key to clinical research aimed at identify the group of patients at risk of primary AVF failure. Currently, careful post-operative monitoring remains the most crucial aspect to overcome the problem of impaired maturation. Up to 80% of patients with immature RC-AVF have problems potentially solvable with early endovascular or surgical correction. Physical examination by experienced practitioners in conjunction with duplex ultrasound examination (DUS) can identify physical signs of non-maturation, understand the underlying cause, and drive for a tailored early planning to treat the complication. New approaches for the early assessment of AVF maturation are under study. Techniques to promote RC-AVF maturation performed through the administration of pre-or peri-operative drugs have missed up to now to prove an efficacy in improving fistula success. The new techniques tested after surgery appear to hold future promise for improving fistula maturation.

Staged brachioradial artery to brachioradial vein arteriovenous fistula creation for hemodialysis access in three patients with a high origin of the radial artery

When patients lack suitable superficial veins in the upper extremity to create an arteriovenous fistula, surgeons are faced with a decision between a synthetic graft or autologous fistula using deep veins, such as a brachial artery to brachial vein arteriovenous fistula. In patients with a high radial artery origin (or brachioradial artery) and inadequate superficial veins, arteriovenous fistula creation will be even more challenging. In the present report, we describe a technique used in three such patients who underwent successful staged brachioradial artery to brachioradial vein arteriovenous fistula creation.

Patency of ePTFE Arteriovenous Graft Placements in Hemodialysis Patients: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) are an appropriate option for vascular access in certain hemodialysis patients. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) has become the dominant material for such grafts, due in part to innovations in graft design and surgical interventions to reduce complications and improve patency rates. Comprehensive evidence syntheses have not been conducted to update AVG performance in an era in which both access choice and ePTFE graft functioning may have changed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing outcomes from recent studies of ePTFE AVGs in hemodialysis, following PRISMA standards. Literature searches were conducted in multiple databases to identify observational and interventional studies of AVG patency and infection risk. Primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency rates were analyzed at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months postplacement. Kaplan-Meier graft survival plots were digitized to recreate individual patient-level data. Patency rates were pooled using a random effects model. We identified 32 studies meeting our selection criteria that were published from 2004 through 2019. A total of 38 study arms of ePTFE grafts were included, representing 3381 AVG accesses placed. The mean primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency rates at 1 year were 41% (95% CI, 35% to 47%), 46% (95% CI, 41% to 51%), and 70% (95% CI, 64% to 75%), respectively. Mean 24-month patency rates were 28% (95% CI, 22% to 33%), 34% (95% CI, 27% to 41%), and 54% (95% CI, 47% to 61%), respectively. A high degree of heterogeneity across studies was observed. Overall risk of infection was not consistently reported, but among available studies the pooled estimate was 9% per patient-year (95% CI, 6% to 12%). This meta-analysis provides an up-to-date estimate of the performance of ePTFE AVGs, within the context of improved graft designs and improved interventional techniques.

A systematic review of the brachial vein arteriovenous fistulas as a viable option for haemodialysis access

OBJECTIVES

International guidelines recommend the use of autogenous vascular access. Where suitable superficial veins are unavailable deeper veins may be used as an option. In most cases, basilic veins are used when cephalic veins are unavailable; arteriovenous fistulas using the brachial vein from the deep venous network are rare. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of the available literature evaluating the use of the brachial vein in arteriovenous fistulas.

METHODS

Systematic literature search of electronic databases in accordance with PRISMA was conducted. The primary outcomes of this study were primary and secondary patency rates for brachial vein arteriovenous fistulas; the secondary outcomes were the rates of access thrombosis, steal syndrome, pseudo-aneurysm and infection.

RESULTS

The 1-year primary, assisted, and secondary patency was recorded at (24%-77%), (45%-85%) and (45%-96%), respectively. The 2-year primary, assisted and secondary patency rate was recorded at (12%-46%), (19%-75%) and (19%-92%), respectively. However, the consistency regarding the reports and definitions used were highly variable. The incidence rate of infection, thrombosis and steal syndrome was 5% (0%-12%), 15.9% (9.5%-35%) and 3% (2%-6%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Available studies support the use of brachial veins as a reliable access option in patients with non-accessible superficial veins where an autologous option is required.

The role of surgery for assisted maturation after endovascular and percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation

Even in the best of circumstances, a significant number of patients will require adjunctive endovascular and/or surgical revision prior to achieving functional patency after endovascular or percutaneous AVF creation, at least within the United States. This rate appears to be higher after percutaneous AVF than after endovascular AVF, although because published reports of the former are mostly derived from American experience and those of the latter derived from experience outside the United States, it is unclear whether these differences are due to the technique itself or cultural and/or anatomic differences in dialysis access practices and patient populations. If arterial inflow is poor, this should be corrected first. When flow is adequate (perhaps 900 cc/min) but no single vein is cannulatable, a dominant suitable vein can be superficialized or transposed. If no suitable vein is dominant (most accurately assessed by using an intraoperative flowmeter), the best vein can be used, with or without occlusion of the other veins or reimplantation into the brachial artery. Finally, if the original anastomosis remains the sole supply to the cannulated vein, the original fistula has achieved assisted primary maturation (and assisted primary patency continues), while if a new arteriovenous anastomosis has been constructed, the original fistula has failed. We point out that for this reason as well as to best utilize the upper arm for later access, endovascular and percutaneous AVFs should be constructed and maintained within an atmosphere where both surgeons and non-surgeons work together on the overall access plan.

Brachio-brachial arteriovenous fistula combined with superficialization of the brachial artery using a short skin incision for hemodialysis

A brachio-brachial arteriovenous fistula with superficialization of the brachial vein and superficialization of the brachial artery are useful vascular access techniques for hemodialysis patients. However, both typically require a long skin incision from the antecubital fossa toward the axillary fossa. In addition, the brachio-brachial arteriovenous fistula in particular, which is created with not a one-stage but a two-stage procedure, requires a relatively long time of 2-3 months before it can be used for hemodialysis. Furthermore, superficialization of the brachial artery usually requires nonarterialized superficial veins for blood return. In cases where patients have no adequate superficial veins for creating an arteriovenous fistula, we have adopted a one-stage operative technique to create a brachio-brachial arteriovenous fistula with superficialization of not only the brachial vein but also the brachial artery using a short skin incision. This technique of a brachio-brachial arteriovenous fistula with superficialization of the brachial artery has several advantages over traditional approaches, including a minimally invasive procedure and early use for vascular access. To our knowledge, the presently described technique and the related data have not been previously reported in the English literature. We herein report the steps of this technique and the midterm follow-up outcomes.

Percutaneous creation of proximal radio-radial arteriovenous hemodialysis fistula before secondary brachial vein elevation

Objective:

We evaluate the creation of a percutaneous proximal radial artery–radial vein arteriovenous fistula with Ellipsys® instead of the usual first-stage brachial artery fistula prior to a second-stage brachial vein elevation, in patients with inadequate cephalic and basilic veins.

Methods:

Single center study of eight patients (six males, mean = 54 years) who underwent a two-stage brachial vein elevation procedure between May 2017 and October 2019. Inclusion criteria were life expectancy > 6 months, patent brachial and proximal radial artery (>2 mm in diameter) absent/inadequate cephalic and basilic veins, existence of a brachial vein >3 mm in diameter, and in continuity with a proximal radial vein > 2 mm in diameter.

Results:

Technical success was 100%. Four patients required angioplasty of a juxta-anastomotic stenosis, accounting for a 6-month primary and secondary patency rates were 68% and 100%, respectively. Access flow averaged 982 mL/min (range 768–1586) at final follow-up evaluation. There were no significant adverse events related to the procedures. All fistulae were elevated at 4–12 (mean: 8) weeks post creation and were successfully cannulated with two needles after healing was completed (2–4 weeks after elevation). No patients developed hand ischemia or arm edema.

Conclusions:

Percutaneous creation of a proximal radial artery–radial vein fistula followed by brachial vein elevation is a safe and reliable option for autogenous access creation in patients with inadequate cephalic or basilic veins. Minimally invasive radial artery inflow and longer available length of the targeted brachial vein available for elevation are the main advantages in skilled hands.

Brachial vein transposition: an alternative to hemodialysis arteriovenous graft

Background

There is currently a worldwide effort to increase the options for autogenous hemodialysis access.

Objectives

To evaluate patency and complications of brachial vein transposition compared to other autogenous hemodialysis accesses.

Methods

A retrospective evaluation of 43 patients and 45 procedures. Patients who did not have adequate superficial veins according to duplex scanning were allocated to brachial vein transposition. The sample was thus divided in two groups, as follows: A: brachial vein transposition n=10 and B: other autogenous accesses n=35.

Results

There were no statistical differences between the two groups in terms of age diabetes, systemic arterial hypertension, dyslipidemias, arteriopathies, neoplasms, kidney disease stage, donor artery diameter, recipient vein diameter, systolic blood pressure in the operated limb, postoperative ischemia, hematoma, or infection. There were no statistical differences in terms of patency on day 7: A 80% vs. B 90% p=0.6, on day 30: A 80% vs. B 86% p=0.6, or on day 60: A 60% vs. B 80% p=0.22. There were statistical differences between the groups for number of previous fistulae A 1.0 ± 0.44 vs. B 0.6 ± 0.3 p = 0.04 and upper limb edema A: 20% x B 0% p = 0.04. A vein with diameter of less than 3 mm was associated with an increased risk of early occlusion (RR = 8 p = 0.0125). During the study period there were no procedures using grafts.

Conclusions

Transposition of brachial vein is an alternative to arteriovenous graft.

The forearm arteriovenous graft between the brachial artery and the brachial vein as a reliable dialysis vascular access for patients with inadequate superficial veins

OBJECTIVE

The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is recommended as the preferred hemodialysis access. However, placing an AVF in all patients may result in poor access outcomes and increased central venous catheter (CVC) use because of increased comorbid conditions, age, and suboptimal vessels. In patients with inadequate superficial veins for AVFs, the use of the brachial veins for creation of forearm arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) has received limited attention. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate outcomes of forearm brachial-brachial AVGs (BB-AVGs) placed in patients with poor superficial veins.

METHODS

We identified 111 BB-AVGs created in 111 consecutive patients, using standard-walled polytetrafluoroethylene grafts, between January 2010 and December 2015. After excluding 6 patients (non-dialysis initiation, missing information, and death within 1 month), we included 105 patients from 21 dialysis centers. We analyzed primary failures, time to cannulation, patency, complications, and revisions. Patency rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The incidence of complications and revisions was expressed as number of events per person-year.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients (median age, 69 years) were followed up for a median time of 21.2 months (interquartile range, 9.2-36.5 months). Of the patients, 72.4% were on chronic hemodialysis and had previously undergone one or more access procedures. At the time of BB-AVG placement, prior accesses were 39 AVFs, 20 tunneled CVCs, and 17 AVGs. BB-AVG rates of primary failure and revision before cannulation were 7.6% and 5.7%, respectively. BB-AVGs were cannulated after a median time of 3.4 weeks (interquartile range, 2.8-4.1 weeks). Primary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 49.5%, 29.5%, and 19.5%. Secondary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 76.3%, 62.7%, and 54.6%. After cannulation, the incidence of complications and revisions was 1.054 and 0.649 per person-year, respectively. Most complications and interventions were due to thrombosis (0.527 per person-year) or stenosis (0.381 per person-year) and related interventions (0.490 per person-year). A minority of patients experienced AVG infections (0.052 per person-year), with only two requiring access removal.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with poor superficial veins, the forearm BB-AVG is a reliable access because of low access-related morbidity and considerable long-term access survival. BB-AVG placement has the advantage of preserving proximal vessels. In these patients, such an approach can delay both rapid exhaustion of vascular sites and early recourse to CVC permanent use.

Radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula recovered with drainage through the brachial vein

Dysfunction of arteriovenous access for hemodialysis is a challenge for the vascular surgeon. Some patients have complex vascular access with problems that are difficult to solve. Careful analysis of the vascular network with ultrasound and dissection of the veins during surgery can help to identify the best option for each access. We introduce and discuss the case of creation of a radio-cephalic fistula with outflow into the brachial vein in 64-year-old hemodialysis male patient. This technique enables extending fistula patency, arterializing the brachial vein, and improves cost efficiency.

Brachial vein transposition is a promising ultimate upper limb autologous arteriovenous angioaccess despite its many pitfalls

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the possibility of using the brachial veins despite their deep location, small caliber, and thin wall.

METHODS

There were 64 patients without superficial veins who were eligible for two-stage brachial vein transposition (BrVT); 54 patients were on hemodialysis, 9 patients had sickle cell disease, and 1 patient had long-term parenteral nutrition. Preoperative imaging was performed with color duplex ultrasound as well as venography for suspected central vein stenosis. A surgical microscope was used to create an end-to-side anastomosis between the brachial vein (medial, if possible) and artery. No minimum vein diameter was required. Postoperative color duplex ultrasound imaging was scheduled at 1 month. Second-stage superficialization was performed 2 to 3 months later with tunnelization and a new arteriovenous anastomosis.

RESULTS

For the 64 patients, cumulative primary patency rates (± standard deviation [SD]) at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years were 50% (±7%), 42% (±7%), 37% (±8%), and 27% (±11%), respectively. Primary assisted patency rates (±SD) at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years were 60% (±6%), 51% (±7%), 45% (±7%), and 37% (±9%), respectively. Secondary patency rates (±SD) at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years were 60% (±6%), 53% (±7%), 53% (±7%), and 45% (±8%), respectively. Early complications included thrombosis, nonmaturation, and upper arm edema. At the second stage (n = 50), four patients presented with unexplained major fibrosis extending cephalad from the first surgical site and preventing any dissection of the vein. Four patients had more usual complications (one nonmaturation, two occlusions of the brachial vein at the previous arteriovenous graft-vein anastomosis), and two were lost to follow-up. Vein transposition in a subcutaneous tunnel was technically unfeasible in eight patients. Of the 64 patients, 40 (62%) had a functional BrVT that was cannulated for effective dialysis after a median interval of 72 days (15-420 days) from the first stage. Mean cumulative secondary patency rates (from first cannulation) at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years were 91% ± 5%, 72% ± 8%, and 62% ± 10%, respectively. Overall, 13 patients were lost to follow-up. Secondary complications were low flow and central vein occlusion. Long-term complications were related to stenosis and thrombosis, aneurysms, and puncture site necrosis. Median follow-up from the first stage was 1.62 years (0.02-11.3 years).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite many pitfalls for the surgeon, BrVT offers promising long-term patency.