A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of the efficacy and safety of endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation

Retrospective evaluation of three types of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts for upper limb vascular access

Currently, three expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) prosthetic graft types are most commonly used for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who require long-term vascular access for hemodialysis. However, studies comparing the three ePTFE grafts are limited. This study compared the clinical efficacy and postoperative complications of three ePTFE prosthetic graft types used for upper limb arteriovenous graft (AVG) surgery among patients with ESKD. Patients with ESKD requiring upper limb AVG surgery admitted to our center between January 2016 and September 2019 were enrolled. Overall, 282 patients who completed the 2-year follow-up were included and classified into the following three groups according to the ePTFE graft type: the GPVG group with the PROPATEN® graft, the GAVG group with the straight-type GORE® ACUSEAL, and the BVVG group with the VENAFLO® II. The patency rate and incidence of access-related complications were analyzed and compared between groups. The patients were followed up postoperatively, and data were collected at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months postoperatively. Respective to these follow-up time points, in the GPVG group, the primary patency rates were 74.29%, 65.71%, 51.43%, and 42.86%; the assisted primary patency rates were 85.71%, 74.29%, 60.00%, and 48.57%; and the secondary patency rates were 85.71%, 80.00%, 71.43%, and 60.00%. In the GAVG group, the primary patency rates were 73.03%, 53.93%, 59.42%, and 38.20%; the assisted primary patency rates were 83.15%, 68.54%, 59.55%, and 53.93%; and the secondary patency rates were 85.39%, 77.53%, 68.54%, and 62.92%, respectively. In the BVVG group, the primary patency rates were 67.24%, 53.45%, 41.38%, and 29.31%; the assisted primary patency rates were 84.48%, 67.24%, 55.17%, and 44.83%; and the secondary patency rates were 86.21%, 81.03%, 68.97%, and 60.34%, respectively. The differences in patency rates across the three grafts were not statistically significant. Overall, 18, 4, and 12 patients in the GPVG, GAVG, and BVVG groups, respectively, experienced seroma. Among the three grafts, GORE® ACUSEAL had the shortest anastomosis hemostatic time. The first cannulation times for the three grafts were GPVG at 16 (±8.2), GAVG at 4 (±4.9), and BVVG at 18 (±12.7) days. No significant difference was found in the postoperative swelling rate between the GPVG group and the other two groups. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were found across the three graft types regarding postoperative vascular access stenosis and thrombosis, ischemic steal syndrome, pseudoaneurysm, or infection. In conclusion, no statistically significant differences in the postoperative primary, assisted primary, or secondary graft patency rates were observed among the three groups. A shorter anastomosis hemostatic time, first cannulation time, and seroma occurrence were observed with the ACUSEAL® graft than with its counterparts. The incidence of upper extremity swelling postoperatively was greater with the PROPATEN® graft than with the other grafts. No statistically significant differences were observed among the three grafts regarding the remaining complications.

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation in the management of severe Hemophilia A and end-stage kidney disease needing hemodialysis access, and beyond

With the contemporary KDOQI, a patient-focused approach in vascular access care is emphasized more than ever when planning RRT. Nevertheless, functional vascular access continues to be the Achilles' heel for successful hemodialysis in specific patient sub-groups, such as the Hemophilia-A population. The newer percutaneous endovascular approach is a safer alternative when conventional surgical AVF poses high bleeding risks perioperatively, which subsequently prevents ESKD patients to have desired permanent dialysis access. This article presents the case of a 45-year-old male with severe Hemophilia-A, who has been dialysis-dependent due to diabetic kidney disease and hypertension. Due to the severity of his progressively worsening bleeding disorder, his previous surgeries to treat other comorbidities have been complicated and involved challenging peri-operative treatment courses that include blood and factor VIII infusions, bleeding wounds, along with prolonged hospital stays. With the fear of bleeding diathesis, a conventional surgical AVF was not pursued, which has left him with a prolonged tunneled CVC while not being considered a candidate for peritoneal dialysis. We offered the patient a left arm percutaneous endovascular AVF creation with the WavelinQ™ 4F Endo-AVF system as an alternative option for his permanent hemodialysis access. An Endo-AVF was created bloodlessly between the left radial artery and lateral radial vein percutaneously with only two 4-French accesses at left wrist. The patient has been receiving full sessions of hemodialysis with expected flow rates and free of the CVC since. Likely the first case of such utilization reported, the utilization of percutaneous Endo-AVF for this patient has suggested not only that the endovascularly created AVF offers a good alternative dialysis access for hemophilia A patient populations, but also due to this technology's unique features, it can be potentially employed in other situations, such as needs for reliable and chronic venous accesses and blood product exchanges.

Performance Characteristics of Candidate Criteria for Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation

BACKGROUND

Twenty to 60% of newly created hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas do not mature adequately for use. One barrier to developing interventions to improve fistula outcomes is a lack of standardized criteria for maturation.

METHODS

Using data from the multicenter, prospective Hemodialysis Fistula Maturation (HFM) Study, we determined sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values of multiple candidate maturation criteria using the HFM Study maturation criteria as the reference. We also compared, across the maturation criteria, relationships between maturation and fistula survival using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

We included 535 of the 602 HFM Study participants. The median (interquartile range) age was 57 (47-65) years, 70% were men, and 45% were Black participants. Depending on the criterion and time frame for ascertainment (3, 4, 5, 6, or 9 months), sensitivities ranged from 57% to 100%, specificities ranged from 85% to 100%, positive predictive values ranged from 88% to 100%, and negative predictive values ranged from 65% to 100%. For all criteria, areas under the curve for the 6-month (0.90-0.97 for unassisted maturation and 0.89-0.95 for overall maturation) and 9-month time frames were similar. Attainment of unassisted maturation was associated with lower risks of fistula abandonment, with hazard ratios ranging from 0.10 to 0.40 depending on the criterion and time frame. Eliminating dialysis adequacy indicators, or simplifying the criteria in other ways, had little effect on performance characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

High performance characteristics are maintained with maturation criteria that are simpler and less burdensome to ascertain than the HFM Study outcome measure.

Early clinical experience and comparison between percutaneous and surgical arteriovenous fistula

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) has been recently developed as an alternative to surgical AVF (sAVF). We report our experience with pAVF in comparison with a contemporaneous sAVF group.

METHODS

Charts of all 51 patients with pAVF performed at our institution were analyzed retrospectively, in addition to 51 randomly selected contemporaneous patients with sAVF (2018-2022) with available follow-up. Outcomes of interest were (i) procedural success rate, (ii) number of maturation procedures required, (iii) fistula maturation rates, and (iv) rates of tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) removal. For patients on hemodialysis (HD), sAVF and pAVF were considered mature when the AVF was used for HD. For patients not on HD, pAVF were considered mature if flow rates of ≥500 mL/min were documented in superficial venous outflow; for sAVF, documentation of maturity based on clinical criteria was required.

RESULTS

Compared patients with sAVF, patients with pAVF were more likely to be male (78% vs 57%; P = .033) and less likely to have congestive heart failure (10% vs 43%; P < .001) and coronary artery disease (18% vs 43%; P = .009). Procedural success was achieved in 50 patients with pAVF (98%). Fistula angioplasties (60% vs 29%; P = .002) and ligation (24% vs 2%; P = .001) or embolization (22% vs 2%; P = .002) of competing outflow veins were more frequently performed on patients with pAVF. The surgical cohort had more planned transpositions (39% vs 6%; P < .001). When all maturation interventions were combined, pAVF required more maturation procedures, but this was not statistically significant (76% vs 53%; P = .692). When planned second-stage transpositions were excluded, pAVF had a statistically significant higher rate of maturation procedures (74% vs 24%; P < .001). Overall, 36 pAVF (72%) and 29 sAVF (57%) developed mature fistulas. This difference, however, was not statistically significant (P = .112). At the time of AVF creation, 26 patients with pAVF and 40 patients with sAVF were on HD, all through use of a TDC. Catheter removal was recorded in 15 patients with pAVF (58%) and 18 patients with sAVF (45%) (P = .314). The mean time until TDC removal in pAVF group was 146 ± 74 days, compared with 175 ± 99 in the sAVF group (P = .341).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with sAVF, rates of maturation after pAVF seem to be similar, but this result may be related to the higher intensity of maturation procedures and patient selection. An analysis of appropriately matched patients will assist in elucidating the possible role of pAVF vis-a-vis sAVF.

A systematic review aggregated data and individual participant data meta-analysis of percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula

OBJECTIVE

To assess the short-term and mid-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation.

METHODS

A systematic search was implemented corresponding to the PRISMA 2020 and the PRISMA for individual participant data (IPD) systematic reviews 2015. Aggregated data from the included studies were obtained and meta-analyzed regarding both the overall pAVF efficacy and the comparison of pAVF with surgical AVF (sAVF). We performed a two-stage IPD meta-analysis for studies comparing pAVF and sAVF regarding primary and secondary patency. Primary end points included primary patency, secondary patency, and functional cannulation.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 1863 patients were included. The overall pAVF, primary patency, secondary patency, functional cannulation and abandonment rates were 54.01% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40.69-66.79), 87.27% (95% CI, 81.53-91.42), 79.94% (95% CI, 65.94-89.13), and 15.58% (95% CI, 7.77-28.79), respectively. The overall pAVF, technical success, maturation, reintervention per person-years and mean time to maturation rates were 97.08% (95% CI, 95.66-98.04), 82.13% (95% CI, 71.64-89.32), 0.80 (95% CI, 0.34-1.47), and 58 days (95% CI, 36.64-92.82), respectively. Secondary patency and pAVF abandonment rates where the only end points were WavelinQ and Ellipsys displayed statistically significant differences of 81.36% (95% CI, 76.15-85.65) versus 92.12% (95% CI, 87.94-94.93) and 32.54% (95% CI, 22.23-44.87) versus 11.13% (95% CI, 4.82-23.65). An IPD meta-analysis of hazard ratios for primary and secondary patency between pAVF and sAVF were 1.27 (95% CI, 0.61-2.67) and 1.25 (95% CI, 0.87-1.80), favoring sAVF. Statistically significant difference between pAVF and sAVF were solely depicted for steal syndrome relative risk of 5.91 (95% CI, 1.12-31.12) and wound infections relative risk of 4.19 (95% CI, 1.04-16.88). Plotting of pAVF smoothed hazard estimate displayed an upsurge in the probability of primary patency failure at 1 month after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we failed to identify statistically significant differences between pAVF and sAVF regarding any of the primary end points, pAVF displayed a decreased risk for steal syndrome and wound infection. Although both the Ellipsys and WavelinQ devices displayed satisfactory secondary patency rates, Ellipsys demonstrated a statistically significant improved rate compared with WavelinQ. Additionally, and despite the borderline statistically insignificant inferior reintervention rate displayed by WavelinQ, one in three WavelinQ pAVFs resulted in abandonment. The introduction of pAVF as a treatment modality calls for standardized definition adjustment and improvement.

Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene Membranes for Vascular Stent Coating: Manufacturing, Biomedical and Surgical Applications, Innovations and Case Reports

Coated stents are defined as innovative stents surrounded by a thin polymer membrane based on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)useful in the treatment of numerous vascular pathologies. Endovascular methodology involves the use of such devices to restore blood flow in small-, medium- and large-calibre arteries, both centrally and peripherally. These membranes cross the stent struts and act as a physical barrier to block the growth of intimal tissue in the lumen, preventing so-called intimal hyperplasia and late stent thrombosis. PTFE for vascular applications is known as expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) and it can be rolled up to form a thin multilayer membrane expandable by 4 to 5 times its original diameter. This membrane plays an important role in initiating the restenotic process because wrapped graft stent could be used as the treatment option for trauma devices during emergency situations and to treat a number of pathological vascular disease. In this review, we will investigate the multidisciplinary techniques used for the production of e-PTFE membranes, the advantages and disadvantages of their use, the innovations and the results in biomedical and surgery field when used to cover graft stents.

Technique of percutaneous closure of an endovascular arteriovenous fistula created for dialysis access

Endovascular arteriovenous fistulas (eAVFs) are a new and less invasive type of creation for dialysis access. The anastomosis for eAVFs often occurs between the ipsilateral proximal radial artery and vein or proximal ulnar artery and vein. As eAVF creations are in locations that are not traditionally used for surgical AVF creations, the question of how to approach reversal of these fistulas arises. Here we present a case of closure of an ulnar artery to ulnar vein eAVF.

Adapting a Dialysis Service for Delivery of Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistulas

The percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) is an exciting and novel addition to the vascular access options available to patients with end-stage kidney disease who require dialysis. Early clinical results have been promising, with high rates of maturation and low rates of reintervention. To successfully adapt an existing hemodialysis service to include the provision of pAVF formation, it is essential to identify and align the interests of key clinical and nonclinical stakeholders. Only through strong collaboration can the service be supported. The authors provide a comprehensive overview of the planning fundamentals required, including the referral pathway, screening and clinical assessment, and practical procedural elements and considerations, as well as follow-up requirements such as cannulation, fistula surveillance, and maintenance. Key staffing requirements are highlighted, including those pertaining to vascular US screening and dialysis nurse training. A broad and structured planning approach ensures that the entire network of key stakeholder interests is included and provides a strong foundation for a compelling business plan to attract the necessary funding and managerial support for the service. The authors present a systematic framework of the essential considerations necessary to facilitate the planning, funding, and ultimately delivery of a successful pAVF service. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Sistema percutáneo de creación de fistulas arteriovenosas en pacientes con hemodiálisis: nuestra experiencia inicial

Introducción: La fístula arteriovenosa es considerada el acceso de elección para los pacientes en hemodiálisis; en los últimos años emerge una alternativa a la creación quirúrgica de esta: la fístula arteriovenosa endovascular. Esta nueva tecnología conlleva un método menos agresivo y sin cirugía.Objetivo: Describir los datos preliminares de nuestra unidad tras la implantación de este sistema novedoso, así como su implicación para enfermería.Material y Método: Análisis descriptivo retrospectivo de las FAV-endovasculares realizadas a cinco pacientes mediante técnica percutánea. Se consideraron las características de los pacientes, de las FAV-endovasculares realizadas y la dificultad para su punción (escala EVA).Resultados: La edad media fue de 63 (47-77) años, 100% hombres, dializándose con catéter tunelizado, a 4 de los pacientes se les había realizado al menos una fístula arteriovenosa quirúrgica sin éxito. La creación de la FAV-endovascular fue exitosa en 4 de los 5 pacientes, todas con localización radio-radial. No hubo complicaciones durante el procedimiento. De las 4 FAV-endovasculares 3 precisaron intervención endovascular posterior para su maduración. La media de tiempo de maduración 4,5 (4-5) meses; las 4 continuaron permeables al año.Puntuada por 9 enfermeras experimentadas, la mediana de dificultad fue: punción inicial: 7, a partir del mes: 5 y comparada con las FAV quirúrgicas: 5.Conclusiones: La FAV-endovascular supuso un procedimiento mínimamente invasivo con menor impacto para los pacientes, elevado éxito inicial, pero precisó intervención endovascular posterior para su maduración. La dificultad para la punción fue más elevada inicialmente. La ausencia de cicatriz  supuso realizar una exploración más exhaustiva.

Percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Currently, percutaneous endovascular creation of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) shows excellent outcomes. However, few systematic research evidence to support clinical decision making on the benefit of endovascular AVF is available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endovascular AVF (endoAVF) in patients with renal failure.

Methods

We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for studies on endovascular or endovascular versus surgery for the creation of AVF. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by Review Manager 5.4 software (Revman, The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) and Stata 15.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, United States).

Results

A total of 14 case series and 5 cohort studies, with 1,929 patients, were included in this study. The technique success was 98.00% for endoAVF (95% CI, 0.97–0.99; I² = 16.25%). There was no statistically significant difference in 3 cohort studies between endovascular and surgical AVF for procedural success (OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.04–11.98; P = 0.80; I² = 53%). The maturation rates of endoAVF were 87.00% (95% CI, 0.79–0.93; I² = 83.96%), and no significant difference was observed in 3 cohort studies between the 2 groups (OR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.20–2.63; P = 0.63; I² = 88%). Procedure-related complications for endoAVF was 7% (95% CI, 0.04–0.17; I² = 78.31%), and it did not show significant difference in 4 cohort studies between the 2 groups (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 0.37–9.16; P = 0.45; I² = 59%).

Conclusion

The endovascular creation of AVF is potentially effective and safe. These important data may provide evidence to support clinicians and patients in making decisions with endovascular AVF. But further research is great necessary due to lack of randomized controlled studies.

Outcomes of Wrist-Access Deep Venous Embolization Following Percutaneous Fistula Creation: A Two-Year Single Center Experience

PURPOSE

During percutaneous arteriovenous (pAVF) fistula creation, deep venous embolization is recommended to encourage superficial venous flow development. The safety of crossing adjacent to the newly formed fistula from wrist venous access has not been established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antegrade deep venous embolization after creation of the pAVF.

MATERIALS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all procedural data related to pAVF creation using the Wavelinq device from October 2019 to November 2021. Patient data from the hospital information systems were collected where the venous access for fistula creation was from the wrist-access (ulnar or radial vein) and where deep venous embolization was performed after forming the fistula and crossing adjacent to the anastomosis. Thirty-nine patients were identified.

RESULTS

Twenty pAVFs were created from wrist ulnar vein access and 19 from radial vein access. The accessed veins were used for embolization of the brachial veins central to the newly created anastomosis. No pAVFs were lost by crossing adjacent to the anastomotic area to perform deep venous embolization at time of creation. There were no major complications, specifically bleeding, infection, pseudoaneurysm formation. Rates of minor complications consisted of two coil migrations to the right atrium requiring uneventful retrieval (5%). Follow-up ultrasound data showed no evidence of delayed complications.

CONCLUSION

In this single center experience crossing alongside the anastomosis of a newly formed percutaneous fistula from an antegrade venous approach was safe with no risk of loss of the pAVF.

Percutaneous Hemodialysis Fistula Creation

Two devices have been recently introduced to European Union and North American clinical practice that allow for percutaneous creation of autogenous hemodialysis fistulas (pAVF). Although there are similarities between the devices, there are many differences. Adoption of either or both technologies by an interventionalist may be determined by the individual's comfort with the device. Importantly, current and future outcomes will shape acceptance and use of these devices. This review focuses on the similarities and differences of each device, the procedures, published outcomes to date and their interpretation and other clinical considerations towards initiation of a successful pAVF program.

A Comparison Between the Efficacy and Safety of Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation and Surgical Fistula Creation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

An endovascular arteriovenous fistula is a recent technological advancement in hemodialysis vascular access. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of endovascular arteriovenous fistula (eAVF) creation compared with surgical arteriovenous fistula (sAVF) creation among patients with chronic kidney disease.

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Clinical Trials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform until May 2021 to perform meta-analyses using random-effects models. Pre-specified primary outcomes were fistula maturation, procedure-related complications, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were procedural technical success, procedure time, all adverse events, and medical expenditure. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of the interventions assessment tool, and the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were used to assess the quality of individual studies and the body of evidence, respectively.

In seven studies including 860 patients, endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation had little to no effect on fistula maturation (odds ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence intervals, 0.05 to 6.91). Meta-analysis could not be performed for procedure-related complications and patient satisfaction due to insufficient data. For secondary outcomes, endovascular arteriovenous fistula resulted in a slight to no difference in procedural technical success (odds ratio, 0.69: 95% confidence intervals, 0.04 to 11.98) and all adverse events (odds ratio, 6.31; 95% confidence intervals, 0.64 to 62.22). Endovascular fistula creation incurred less medical expenditure than sAVF (mean difference, USD 12760; 95% confidence intervals, -19710 to -5820). Meta-analysis for procedure time was not performed because one of the studies had a critical risk of bias. All of these outcomes were of low certainty of evidence or very low certainty of evidence.

There was limited evidence for supporting endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation over conventional surgical arteriovenous fistula creation for patients with chronic kidney disease. Multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of eAVFs in selected populations.

Endovascular Versus Surgical Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Rationale & Objective

To facilitate the process of dialysis for patients with kidney failure, an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is created using either a surgical or percutaneous approach. We sought to compare the efficacy and procedural outcomes in creating an AVF percutaneously using Ellipsys (Avenu Medical) or WavelinQ (Becton Dickinson Medical) with surgery in all patients with kidney failure requiring a permanent AVF for dialysis.

Study Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Setting & Study Populations

All patients requiring a permanent AVF for dialysis.

Selection Criteria for Studies

We included studies that compared either the Ellipsys device or WavelinQ directly with surgery to create an AVF for long-term dialysis.

Data Extraction

Two reviewers independently reviewed the studies and extracted the data. Conflicts were resolved with a discussion and approval from the senior author.

Analytical Approach

Fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to pool the fixed sizes and 95% CIs based on the level of heterogeneity.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference observed between surgical AVF and endovascular AVF when comparing the primary outcomes of procedural success (OR = 1.44; 95% CI, 0.35, 5.88; P = 0.61; I2 = 0%), complications (OR = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.06, 1.46; P = 0.13; I2 = 69%), and the secondary outcomes of interest that included follow-up time (mean difference [MD] = -17.71; 95% CI, -189.53, 154.12; P = 0.84; I2 = 94%), failure rate (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.21, 5.13; P = 0.97; I2 = 85%), and time to 2-needle cannulation (MD = -5.40; 95% CI, -38.88, 28.08; P = 0.75; I2 = 0%). However, a statistically significant difference was seen among the 2 groups for procedural time (MD = -54.25; 95% CI, -59.78, -48.71; P < 0.001; I2 = 98%), number of interventions needed to maintain patency (OR = 1.73; 95% CI, 1.22, 2.45; P < 0.01; I2 = 94%), and primary patency rate (OR = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23,0.52; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%).

Limitations

The total number of studies included in this review was limited, with 3 of the 4 included studies being retrospective and only 1 being prospective. There was a lack of heterogeneity and randomization.

Conclusions

Percutaneous fistula creation using Ellipsys or WavelinQ is a unique and safe alternative with outcomes comparable to surgery. Future studies are needed, including observational studies in current clinical practice, to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of endovascular AVF creation in clinical populations.

Vascular Access in Therapeutic Apheresis: One Size Does not Fit All

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic apheresis has been used in treating hematological and non-hematological diseases. For a successful procedure, efficient vascular access is required. Presently, peripheral venous access (PVA), central venous catheterization (CVC), implantable ports, and arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are used. This review aims to evaluate different type of access and their pros and cons to help physicians determine the best venous access.

METHODS

The electronic search included PubMed and Google Scholar up to Nov. 2020. The Mesh terms were apheresis, peripheral catheterization, central catheterization, and arteriovenous fistula.

RESULTS

A total of 228 studies were found through database searching. Two independent authors reviewed the articles using their titles and abstracts; 88 articles were selected and the full text was reviewed. Finally, 25 were included. The inclusion criteria were studies incorporating patients with any indication for apheresis.

CONCLUSION

PVA has been promoted in recent years in many centers across the United States to lower the rate of complications associated with vascular access and to make this procedure more accessible. Several factors are involved in selecting appropriate venous access, such as the procedure's duration and frequency, patient's vascular anatomy, and staff's experience. In short-term procedures, temporary vascular access like PVA or CVC is preferred. Permanent vascular access such as AVF, tunneled cuffed central lines, and implantable ports are more beneficial in prolonged treatment period but each patient has to be evaluated individually by apheresis team for the most appropriate method.

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation: A Review

Endovascular arteriovenous fistula (endoAVF) creation offers a minimally invasive method for the formation of arteriovenous shunts utilized for hemodialysis. Currently, there exist two similar yet unique devices: WavelinQ and Ellipsys. This review analyzes the anatomy, pre- and postoperative considerations, fistula creation methods, and outcomes associated with endoAVF. Currently, data are limited with regard to clinical efficacy of endoAVFs when compared to surgical AVFs. However, early data suggest endoAVFs are a useful technique in the creation of AVFs.

Feasibility of Creation of an Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula in Patients Undergoing Preoperative Vascular Mapping

Background

The first endovascular arteriovenous fistula (endoAVF) device (WavelinQ), a novel percutaneous technique of AVF creation, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2018 and has been placed in a small number of United States patients on hemodialysis. It is unknown how often patients with advanced CKD have vascular anatomy suitable for WavelinQ creation. The goal of this study was to determine the proportion of patients with vascular anatomy suitable for WavelinQ creation and to assess patient characteristics associated with such suitability.

Methods

All patients referred for vascular access placement at a large academic medical center underwent standardized preoperative sonographic vascular mapping to assess suitability for an AVF. During a 2-year period (March 2019 to March 2021), we assessed the suitability of the vessels for creation of WavelinQ. We then compared the demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and vascular mapping measurements between patients who were or were not suitable for WavelinQ.

Results

During the study period, 437 patients underwent vessel mapping. Of these, 51% of patients were eligible for a surgical AVF, and 32% were eligible for a WavelinQ AVF; 63% of those suitable for a surgical AVF were also suitable for a WavelinQ AVF. Patients with a vascular anatomy suitable for WavelinQ were younger (age 55±15 versus 60±14 years, P=0.01) but similar in sex, race, diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and peripheral artery disease.

Conclusions

Among patients with CKD with vascular anatomy suitable for a surgical AVF, 63% are also suitable for a WavelinQ endoAVF. Older patients are less frequently suitable for WavelinQ.

Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula Creation with the 4 French WavelinQ™ EndoAVF System

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous devices for creation of native arteriovenous fistulae offer an alternative to traditional open surgical techniques. The 4 Fr WavelinQ EndoAVF System was developed as a lower profile alternative to facilitate access through smaller vessels and minimize access site complications; The current report is the original first experience of this device, assessing outcome in 120 patients followed for 6 months.

METHODS

The use of the 4 Fr WavelinQ system in three studies, EASE (32 patients), EASE-2 (24 patients), and the EU post-market clinical follow-up study (64 patients) was aggregated and analyzed. Patients were followed with duplex ultrasound at discharge and follow-up visits at 1, 3, and 6 months. Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates were evaluated as Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates and standard errors. Time to maturity and time to successful cannulation were defined as the mean ± SD days from the procedure in patients enrolled on dialysis.

RESULTS

Procedural success was achieved in 116 patients (96.7%). Primary, assisted-primary, and secondary 6-month patency rates were 71.9%±4.5%, 80.7%±4.1%, and 87.8%±3.3%, respectively. Time to maturity averaged 41±17 days. Time to successful cannulation averaged 68±51 days. Device-related serious adverse events were reported in 3/120 patients (2.5%) and procedure-related serious adverse events occurred in 7/120 patients (5.8%). Arterial or venous access complications were not reported in any of the patients. Access circuit reinterventions were performed in 23 patients (19.2%), split between those performed for EndoAVF maturation (13/120, 10.8%) and maintenance (11/120. 9.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous creation of native dialysis fistulae with the 4 Fr WavelinQ EndoAVF System is safe and effective, with favorable durability and a low rate of serious complications and reinterventions through 6-month follow-up. Utilization of the 4F device allows for percutaneous fistula creation between the radial artery and radial vein or the ulnar artery and ulnar vein. These findings suggest that the 4 Fr device is a useful percutaneous alternative to open surgical AVF or endovascular AVF with larger-bore devices.

A Comparison of Outcomes Between Open and Endovascular Arteriovenous Access Creation for Hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

Preliminary outcomes for percutaneous endovascular autogenous access (endoAVF) have shown promising results; however, comparisons with surgical cohorts in dialysis populations are lacking. This study compares autogenous arteriovenous access created with the EverlinQ endoAVF system with accesses created by conventional surgical technique with respect to functional and patency related outcomes.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, retrospective review of autogenous arteriovenous accesses entered into a prospective database. Patients receiving radiocephalic, brachiocephalic, or endoAVF arteriovenous accesses between 2014 -2019 were included. Autogenous access maturation, primary patency, secondary patency, steal syndrome, and re-interventions were collected and analyzed using standard statistical and survival analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 369 accesses were created during the study period, including 61 endovascular accesses, 171 radiocephalic accesses, and 137 brachiocephalic accesses (median follow-up 17 months; range 1 - 71 months). Maturation failure at the end of follow-up was 27±6%, 27±5%, and 18±4% for endovascular, radiocephalic, and brachiocephalic accesses, respectively (p =.049 for brachiocephalic vs. endovascular accesses). Primary patencies at 12 and 24 months were 42±5% and 32±7% for endovascular accesses, 43±4% and 24±4% for radiocephalic accesses, and 42±4% and 29±4% for brachiocephalic accesses (p=.906). Secondary patencies at 12 and 24 months were 68±6% and 60±7% for endovascular accesses, 75±3% and 67±4% for radiocephalic accesses, and 91±3% and 81±4% for brachiocephalic accesses (p=.006 for brachiocephalic vs. endovascular accesses). There were no statistically significant differences in ischemic steal syndrome (3.3%, 4.1% and 8.0%; p=.229) or total reinterventions/year (1.0±3.1, 0.9±1.8, and 1.2±1.8; p=.289) for endovascular, radiocephalic, or brachiocephalic arteriovenous accesses, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EndoAVF compare favorably with respect to maturation and patency compared with surgically created accesses in a real-world cohort. Outcomes and reintervention rates are similar to conventional radiocephalic arteriovenous accesses, but are inferior with respect to patency and maturation to brachiocephalic accesses.

Covered stents versus balloon angioplasty for failure of arteriovenous access: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with end-stage renal disease may require arteriovenous (AV) access in the form of arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) for haemodialysis. AV access dysfunction requires intervention such as plain balloon angioplasty or covered stents to regain patency.

AIM

To systematically review and meta-analyse the patency outcomes of covered stents in failing haemodialysis AV access, compared with balloon angioplasty.

METHODS

The review was first registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018069955) before data collection. We searched six electronic databases to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up until August 2020, without language restriction. Two reviewers assessed the suitability and quality of studies for inclusion using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. We meta-analysed data using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

We included seven studies including 1147 patients in the systematic review, of which 867 had AVGs and 280 had AVFs. One study was an ongoing RCT. In the meta-analyses, we assessed patients with failing AVGs only. Overall risk of bias was moderate. Covered stents were associated with lower loss of patency versus angioplasty alone at 6, 12 and 24 months (OR 4.48, 95% CI 1.98 to 10.14, p<0.001; OR 4.07, 95% CI 1.74 to 9.54, p=0.001; OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.29, p=0.01, respectively). Covered stents afforded superior access circuit primary patency compared with angioplasty alone at 6 and 12 months (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.80, p<0.001; OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.41, p=0.02, respectively). This was not significant at 24 months. There was no significant difference in loss of secondary patency between groups at 12 or 24 months (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.23, p=0.25; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.154, p=0.34, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our results support use of covered stents over angioplasty alone, at 6, 12 and 24 months in failing AVGs. Further clinical trials are warranted.

Endovascular arteriovenous fistulas- are they the answer we haven't been looking for?

INTRODUCTION

Surgically created arteriovenous fistulas are the accepted gold standard for the establishment of hemodialysis access in patients requiring dialysis. However, primary and maturation failures may limit their usage. Recent advances in endovascular technology have resulted in the creation of devices for endovascular arteriovenous fistula formation. These devices may offer an additional or alternative approach to fistula formation in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the limitations of surgical arteriovenous fistulas and the endovascular devices currently available. The review covers initial trial data and subsequent studies examining their use.

EXPERT OPINION

Early results achieved with endovascular fistula formation are encouraging. Current limitations of this technology include anatomic suitability and a high rate of re-interventions required to establish maturity. Greater uptake of the technology will also require a review of long-term outcomes in larger patient cohorts.

Comparison of Ellipsys Percutaneous and Proximal Forearm Gracz-Type Surgical Arteriovenous Fistulas

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) are created by establishing a proximal forearm anastomosis and offer a safe and reliable vascular access. This study compares the Ellipsys percutaneous AVF with a proximal forearm Gracz-type surgical AVF, chosen for comparison as it is constructed at the same anatomical site.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study of prospectively collected clinical data.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

All vascular access procedures conducted during a 34-month period were reviewed. The study groups comprised 89 percutaneous AVFs and 69 surgical AVFs.

EXPOSURE

Percutaneous or surgical AVF placement.

OUTCOME

AVF patency, function, and complications.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Patency rates for each AVF group were evaluated by competing risk survival analysis using a cumulative incidence function. Association of primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency with the AVF groups was examined by Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100% for both groups. Average procedure times were 14 minutes for percutaneous AVFs and 74 minutes for surgical AVFs (P < 0.001). Proximal radial artery (PRA) was used in all percutaneous AVF cases. Inflow for surgical AVFs included radial (30%), ulnar (12%), and brachial (58%) arteries. Outflow veins for both groups were the cephalic and/or basilic veins. Access flow volumes, times to maturation, and overall numbers of interventions per patient-year were not significantly different. Cumulative incidence of primary patency failure at 12 months was lower for surgical AVF (47% vs 64%, P = 0.1), but secondary patency failure was not different between groups (20% vs 12%, P = 0.3). PRA surgical AVFs had similar primary patency (65% vs 64%, P = 0.8) but higher secondary patency failure rates than percutaneous AVFs at 12 months (34% vs 12%, P = 0.04).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study with a relatively short follow-up period, and not all patients required hemodialysis at the end of study.

CONCLUSIONS

Both percutaneous and surgical AVFs demonstrated high rates of technical success and secondary patency. Percutaneous AVFs required shorter procedure times. The rate of intervention was similar. When a distal radial artery AVF is not feasible, percutaneous AVF might offer an appropriate procedure for creating a safe and functional access, maintaining further proximal forearm surgical AVF creation options.

Comparison of surgical versus percutaneously created arteriovenous hemodialysis fistulas

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to compare the results between percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas (p-AVFs) created with the Ellipsys device (Ellipsys Vascular Access System; Avenu Medical, San Juan Capistrano, Calif) and surgical arteriovenous fistulas (s-AVFs).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective comparative study of the first 107 patients who had undergone p-AVF creation with the Ellipsys system from May 2017 to May 2018 with an equal number of consecutive patients who had undergone s-AVF creation in our center during the same period. The primary endpoints included the maturation and patency rates. The secondary endpoints were reintervention, risk of infection, and the incidence of steal syndrome and aneurysm formation.

RESULTS

The demographic, hypertension, and diabetes data were similar for both groups. The only difference between the two groups was that more p-AVF patients had already been receiving hemodialysis (61% vs 47%; P < .05). The p-AVFs showed superior maturation rates at 6 weeks (65% vs 50%; P = .01). The primary patency rates were greater for the s-AVFs at 12 months (86% vs 61%; P < .01). However, primary patency was comparable between the two groups at 24 months (52% vs 55%; P = .48). No significant difference was found in the secondary patency rates at 12 (90% vs 91%) and 24 (88% vs 91%) months. At the 2-year follow-up point, the rate of percutaneous reintervention was similar; however, the s-AVFs had required more frequent surgical revision (36% vs 17%; P = .01). Issues with wound healing and infection were also more frequent with s-AVFs (9% vs 0.9%; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Fistulas created percutaneously with the Ellipsys system showed superior maturation rates and similar patency with s-AVFs created in an experienced high-volume vascular surgery practice. p-AVFs had a lower risk of wound healing issues, infection, and surgical revision. Larger, prospective, randomized multicenter studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Initial Outcomes Following Introduction of Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula Program with Comparison to Historical Surgically Created Fistulas

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been an abundance of encouraging data regarding the creation of percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas. Despite promising data regarding their clinical maturation, a paucity of data exists which provides direct comparison between percutaneously created AVFs (pAVF) and open surgically created AVFs (sAVF). This study has 2 primary objectives: First, to compare clinical outcomes of pAVFs to sAVFs, with emphasis on clinical maturation and frequency of postoperative interventions to facilitate maturation. Second, to contribute toward the evidence-based incorporation of the pAVF procedure into the hemodialysis access algorithm.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review was performed on all consecutive patients undergoing surgically created brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistula (BC-AVF, sAVF group) from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018 and Ellipsys-created percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF group) from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. Comparative analysis between groups was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients underwent Ellipsys-created pAVF with mean age of 56.7 ± 22.6 years (12 males [50%], 12 females [50%]) and 62 patients underwent surgically created BC-AVF with mean age of 62.5 ± 13.2 years (32 males [52%], 30 females [48%]). Both the pAVF and sAVF groups had comparable mean operating times (60 ± 40 vs. 56 ± 25 min, P = 0.67) and frequency of procedural technical success (23 [96%] vs. 62 [100%], P = 0.28), respectively. The pAVF group had a lower clinical maturation rate (12 [52%] vs. 54 [87%], P = 0.003) and a higher primary failure rate (9 [39%] vs. 6 [10%], P = 0.003) when compared to the sAVF group. The pAVF group had an increased overall rate of undergoing a postoperative intervention (18 [78%] vs. 13 [21%], P< 0.001), as well as an increased number of total postoperative interventions (1.1 ± 0.9 vs. 0.3 ± 0.6 interventions, P< 0.001) compared to the sAVF group. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the juxta anastomotic segment was the most prevalent postoperative intervention performed in the pAVF group and occurred at a significantly increased frequency when compared to the sAVF group rate (13 [57%] vs. 5 [8%], P< 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In our single-center retrospective review, patients undergoing Ellipsys-created pAVF in the first year following introduction of percutaneous endovascular had inferior rates of clinical maturation and underwent more postoperative interventions when compared to historical patients undergoing surgically created BC-AVF. Outcome discrepancies compared to previously reported Ellipsys data demonstrate a need for further studies examining the practical translatability of the pAVF.

Initial 6-month quality review of a percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula program

Background:

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas have recently proven successful alternatives to surgical arteriovenous fistulas with encouraging initial results. The Ellipsys Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula System utilizing ultrasound and thermal energy has recently received approval for use in the United States. At the University of New Mexico, we developed an integrated service between Vascular Surgery, Interventional Radiology, and Interventional Nephrology for percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas utilizing Ellipsys.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective chart review of the initial 6 months (January 1st 2019 to July 1st 2019) of 18 percutaneous arteriovenous fistula placements to evaluate our initial technical success rate, the number of arteriovenous fistulas meeting maturation characteristics or use in dialysis, and to identify areas for quality improvement.

Results:

Initial technical success was achieved in 17 out of 18 arteriovenous fistulas (94.4%). Three patients did not report for any follow-up at the end of the initial 6 months. Of the remaining patients, 7 out of 15 were using their arteriovenous fistulas or meeting maturation characteristics at the end of the study (46.7%). Patient loss to follow-up/no-show (16.7%), patient not yet requiring hemodialysis (27.8%), and poor post-surgical maturation and/or need for additional maturation procedures (55.6%) were the predominate reasons for non-use. We identified improved coordination of care, early intervention, and outpatient dialysis center education as the primary areas of focus for quality improvement.

Conclusion:

Initial technical success rate of percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas placement was comparable to published studies. Early and aggressive secondary angiographic interventions of arteriovenous fistulas failing to meet cannulation requirements, improved coordination of post-operative care, and outpatient dialysis center education appear to be the primary targets for quality improvement.

Study of Arteriovenous Fistula Cases in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Arteriovenous fistulas are a preferred choice for hemodialysis access in chronic kidney disease patients. There is increased adoption of arteriovenous fistula creation in Nepal. Our objective is to study various arteriovenous fistulas that have been created in our center.

METHODS

This is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in a tertiary care hospital including all cases of arteriovenous fistula creation from January 2018 to December 2019. We obtained the ethical clearance from the institutional review committee of Kathmandu University School of Medical sciences. Convenient sampling method was used. Detailed vascular mapping and color doppler ultrasonography was done in the bilateral upper limb as preoperative preparation and to choose a site for arteriovenous fistula creation. Data were entered into the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 for analysis.

RESULTS

Among 50 patients, the most common location was brachiobasilic 20 (40%) patients followed by brachiocephalic 18 (36%), radiocephalic 11 (22%), and arteriovenous graft between the brachial artery and axillary vein 1 (2%). The mean duration of hospital stay was 1.44 days. Three (6%) patients required re-intervention, all within 24 hours. Two (4%) patients had a failure of arteriovenous fistula requiring the creation of a new arteriovenous fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

Brachiobasilic was the most common location for arteriovenous fistula creation. Reintervention was not common.