Comparison of Outcomes of Drug-Coated Balloons versus Plain Balloons in Secondary Interventions on Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistulae

PURPOSE

To compare patency and reintervention outcomes after either plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) or drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) for venous stenoses after percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred ninety-five pAVFs were successfully created during the study period, 141 using Ellipsys and 54 using Wavelinq. After pAVF creation, 95 patients (48.7%) required secondary percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with either POBA (n = 55, 58%) or DCBA (n = 40, 42.1%). The most common site for PTA was the juxta-anastomotic segment (75.5%; 74/98). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to compare target lesion primary patency, access circuit primary patency, secondary patency, and reintervention rates in the POBA and DCBA cohorts.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 55 (62%) patients in the POBA cohort and 14 of 40 (35%) patients in the DCBA cohort required reinterventions for pAVF restenosis. Mean number of follow-up days among patients treated with POBA was 1,030.4 (SD ± 342.9) and among those treated with DCBA was 744.4 (SD ± 403.5). The use of POBA compared with DCBA was not associated with target lesion and access circuit primary patency loss in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81; 95% CI, 0.93-3.51; P = .080; and HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.73-4.28; P = .210, respectively). However, time from fistula creation to the first PTA (days) was statistically significantly associated with both outcomes (HR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.994-0.999; P = .009; and HR, 0.997; 95% CI, 0.992-0.999; P = .021, respectively). There were no major adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective single-center analysis of pAVFs, considerably more patients who underwent PTA with POBA after pAVF creation required reinterventions compared with PTA using DCBA, although the follow-up time of POBA was longer. In multivariate analysis, no differences were noted in the hazard of patency loss between POBA and DCBA.

Multi-Center Two-Year Patency Outcomes of Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistulas (endoAVF) Created with a 4 French System

PURPOSE

To assess multicenter two-year patency outcomes of endovascular arteriovenous fistulas (endoAVF) created with the WavelinQ device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who had fistulas created at three centers from January 2018 to December 2020 were included in this retrospective study. In total, 112 patients underwent endoAVF creation [40 females, 72 males; mean age 60 years (range 18-88)]. Data collected included patient demographics, location of fistula creation, interventions performed, and brachial artery flows pre- and post-creation. Two-year cumulative patency, functional patency, and primary patency were assessed with Kaplan-Meier methodology. Factors affecting patency and maturation were examined using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Technical success defined as angiographically successful endoAVF creation was 97.3% (109/112). In 11 patients the fistula did not mature for dialysis use. For 98 patients (87%) with endoAVF maturation, 12- and 24-month cumulative patency was 94.3% and 91.7%. Functional patency (two-needle cannulation) at 12 and 24 months was 95.7% and 92.7%, respectively. Median maturation time is 95 days (IQR 51-231 days). Male gender and brachial vein coiling at the time of endoAVF creation were predictive of maturation. There were 34 censored events (four patients undergoing renal transplantation; 30 patients deceased). Number of reinterventions per patient year was 0.73 where 43 were maturation procedures and 101 were maintenance procedures. One Grade 3 complication occurred of arterial access puncture site pseudoaneurysm.

CONCLUSION

A high two-year functional and cumulative patency following endoAVF creation with the WavelinQ device was observed in this multicenter real-world experience Level of Evidence: 3 Level of Evidence III.

Novel classification of proximal forearm perforator vein in the planning and creation of percutaneous and surgical Gracz-type arteriovenous fistulae

BACKGROUND

The perforator vein determines whether it is feasible to create a percutaneous (pAVF) or surgical "Gracz-type" arteriovenous fistula (sAVF). Creating a standard anatomic classification of the antecubital region is beneficial to both the selection of the appropriate device and/or procedure and technical outcomes. Accordingly, an analysis of a large cohort of patients undergoing pAVF/sAVF was performed, focusing on perforator vein anatomical suitability, and a novel anatomical classification of the antecubital region was developed and proposed.

METHODS

Between August 2018 and July 2022, chronic or end-stage kidney disease patients as well as patients anticipated an initiation of apheresis, who were referred for vascular access planning, underwent a standardized evaluation of upper extremities. A vessel mapping summary detailing the vasculature and the access creation plan was completed, indicating the anatomical suitability for sAVF and pAVF (Ellipsys and WavelinQ) techniques.

RESULTS

Of 524 patients, 36.5% were female (average age 65 years). 53.2% were on dialysis, 41.6% had diabetes, and 13.2% had a previously failed permanent dialysis access. The anatomy for successful pAVF creation was judged to be suitable in 54% of patients for an Ellipsys-pAVF, and 29.8% for WavelinQ-pAVF. Of the WavelinQ group, 54.4% had suitable anatomy for ulnar, 26.9% for radial, and 18.6% for both ulnar/radial anastomoses. Additionally, 60.7% had suitable anatomy for pAVF creation with at least one of the systems, while 22.5% were suited for both types of pAVF-systems. 80.3% were candidates for creation of a Gracz-AVF.

CONCLUSION

Overall, we found that about 60% of patients are likely candidates for a pAVF, with 80% being candidates for creation of a Gracz-AVF. Male patients have significantly higher suitability for most types of AVF creation, and younger patients are more suitable for Ellipsys-pAVF and RCAVFs. Most importantly, a universal classification of perforator vein was developed, which is indispensable in modern vascular access planning.

Multidisciplinary working group: key role for percutaneous endovascular AV fistula program. Point of view

Chronic kidney disease is a progressive condition that affects more than 10% of the general population worldwide. Hemodialysis is the most common therapeutic option for kidney failure, which develops in around one out of 1000 individuals in the general population. Hemodialysis needs a vascular access to connect to the extracorporeal machine. In the last few years percutaneous endovascular arterio-venous fistula technique has been increasingly employed with very promising results. Several advantages have been demonstrated in comparison to the standard surgical creation of an arteriovenous fistula. The percutaneous endovascular arterio-venous fistula technique requires multidisciplinary team work. In our practice, we have organized a multidisciplinary team that includes nephrologists, play a key role, interventional radiologists, vascular surgeons, anesthesiologists, and dialysis nurses. Procedural outcomes and feedback received from patients and family members are evaluated periodically in order to improve results. Nephrologists are involved in each step of the management of the percutaneous endovascular arterio-venous fistula: selection, mapping, creation, and follow up. Patient empowerment, education and involvement is required at each step. A dedicated training program, involving patients and the caregiver team is therefore needed. Additional research is required to confirm the benefit of the multidisciplinary team management in end-stage kidney disease patients.

Percutaneous Creation of Hemodialysis Fistulas

Non-surgical, percutaneous, or endovascular hemodialysis arteriovenous creation represent an evolution of access creation away from traditional surgical fistulas. These fistulas are additional to surgical alternatives and published studies with the two commercially available devices suggest positive outcomes in terms of technical success, maturation, functionality, and patency. Relevant published studies are presented, and other considerations related to these new devices/procedures are also summarized.

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.

Practical guide of vascular ultrasound in arteriovenous fistulae

The use of vascular ultrasound, especially with the increasing prevalence of percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas, has taken a central role as a diagnostic and therapeutic imaging procedure in vascular access creation. The current review article stresses the importance of vascular ultrasound in arteriovenous fistula, from planning to creation to maintenance. It summarises and gives practical guidance regarding sonographic criteria for vascular access procedure planning, the application of vascular ultrasound intraoperatively and during follow-up. Ultrasound education and training modalities to meet high standards of patient care in hemodialysis are presented.

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation-Review of Current Experience

Functioning vascular access is an essential element for life-saving hemodialysis therapy. A surgically-created arteriovenous fistula has been considered the best option for many years. Recently, two manufacturers developed systems for percutaneous/endovascular creation of an arteriovenous fistula (WavelinQ and Ellipsys). We provide a review of the available experience with these systems and discuss advantages and disadvantages.

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.

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation

The first percutaneous systems used to create an arteriovenous fistula for hemodialysis were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2018 and included the Ellipsys and WavelinQ devices. Early results and longer-term studies of these catheter-based devices suggest that they offer important benefits and potentially improved outcomes in patients with appropriate anatomy. The deep communicating vein in the cubital fossa and its relationship to the proximal radial artery or proximal ulnar artery are key vascular elements of both systems. The devices differ significantly in technical design, energy source, imaging requirements, procedure times, catheters, access vessel sites, and techniques. We review the two approved percutaneous arteriovenous fistula devices, including technical considerations, selecting the appropriate patient, postoperative evaluation, interventions, outcomes, potential complications, and cannulation issues.

Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula Creation with the WavelinQ 4-French EndoAVF System: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of 30 Patients

PURPOSE

To retrospectively assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation with the WavelinQ 4-F EndoAVF System.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From February 2018 to June 2020, 30 pAVFs were created in 30 consecutive patients (men; age, 55.3 years ± 13.6). Of the 30 patients, 21 (70%) were already on hemodialysis using a central venous catheter. The primary outcome measures were technical success, complications, and cannulation rate. The secondary outcome measures included the number of secondary procedures needed for cannulation, maintenance time to cannulation, and pAVF survival.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100%. The adverse event rate was 6.7% (2/30), including a pseudoaneurysm of the brachial artery that developed immediately after sheath removal and an aneurysm of the anastomosis 17 days after the procedure, which was treated with a covered stent placed in the arterial side. The mean follow-up was 547 days ± 315.7 (range, 14-1,071 days). The cannulation rate was 86.7% (26/30). The mean time to cannulation was 61.3 days ± 32.5 (range, 15-135 days). The mean follow-up after cannulation was 566.2 days ± 252.7 (range, 35-1,041 days). Four pAVFs were thrombosed after cannulation, with 2 of them successfully declotted. Sixteen interventions were needed to achieve cannulation after the index procedure in 15 patients (overall, 0.53 procedures/patient). Seven maintenance endovascular interventions (following cannulation) were performed during the follow-up period in 6 patients (overall, 0.27 procedures/patient, 0.17 procedures/patient-years). For the pAVFs that were cannulated, patency was 96% at 1 year, and 82% at 2 and 3 years, according to the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This initial experience suggests that pAVF creation is safe and can be successfully performed with high maturation and long-term patency rates. Larger-scale prospective studies are needed to validate the results.

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.

Multicenter European real-world utilization of VasQ anastomotic external support device for arteriovenous fistulae

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of arteriovenous fistulae (AVF), created with VasQ external support device under standard clinical practice across three vascular access clinics.

METHODS

This multinational, retrospective study evaluated prospectively collected clinical outcomes of both forearm and upper arm brachiocephalic AVF (BCAVF) created using the VasQ device. Fifty-one AVF patients were pooled from three different vascular access centers in Germany, Italy, and Spain. Postprocedure outcomes were assessed by flow measurement with ultrasound examination in all centers. Primary failure, usability, patency, and intervention rates during the study period were evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-one VasQ devices were implanted during 37 forearm (36 radiocephalic and 1 ulnar-basilic AVF) and 14 BCAVF procedures. The study population comprised mostly males (73%) and Caucasians (82%), with a mean age of 62.5 years (range, 38-84 years) and mean body mass index of 29.2. One patient died owing to access-unrelated reasons, and one patient was lost to follow-up without AVF assessment after its creation. From the remaining 49, 3 patients had a follow-up of less than 4 weeks and were excluded from maturation, primary failure, and dialysis initiation analysis (because those factors could not be evaluated yet), leaving 46 patients in this evaluation. Maturation was achieved in 91% of patients. The primary failure rate was 9%. A primary patency rate of 77% was observed at 6, 12, and 18 months. The secondary patency rate was 91% at 6 months, and 85% at 12 months and 18 months. Both primary patency and secondary patency did not differ statistically when comparing forearm AVF with BCAVF (P > .25). Successful cannulation was achieved in 86% of patients (32/37) requiring dialysis with a median time from creation to cannulation of 46 days. Of those patients, the functional patency rate was 94%. Five patients underwent seven interventions to maintain or restore patency or functionality, with an overall rate of 0.248 interventions per patient-year.

CONCLUSIONS

AVFs created with VasQ external support device demonstrated promising patency and functionality outcomes in multicentric real-world setting across the two most commonly used anatomic locations.

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.

A call to optimize haemodialysis vascular access care in healthcare disrupted by COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in major disruption to the delivery of both routine and urgent healthcare needs in many institutions across the globe. Vascular access (VA) for haemodalysis (HD) is considered the patient's lifeline and its maintenance is essential for the continuation of a life saving treatment. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the provision of VA for dialysis was already constrained. Throughout the pandemic, inevitably, many patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have not received timely intervention for VA care. This could have a detrimental impact on dialysis patient outcomes in the near future and needs to be addressed urgently. Many societies have issued prioritisation to allow rationing based on clinical risk, mainly according to estimated urgency and need for treatment. The recommendations recently proposed by the European and American Vascular Societies in the COVID-19 pandemic era regarding the triage of various vascular operations into urgent, emergent and elective are debatable. VA creation and interventions maintain the lifeline of complex HD patients, and the indication for surgery and other interventions warrants patient-specific clinical judgement and pathways. Keeping the use of central venous catheters at a minimum, with the goal of creating the right access, in the right patient, at the right time, and for the right reasons, is mandatory. These strategies may require local modifications. Risk assessments may need specific "renal pathways" to be developed rather than applying standard surgical risk stratification. In conclusion, in order to recover from the second wave of COVID-19 and prepare for further phases, the provision of the best dialysis access, including peritoneal dialysis, will require working closely with the multidisciplinary team involved in the assessment, creation, cannulation, surveillance, maintenance, and salvage of definitive access.

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.

Anatomic suitability for commercially available percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation systems

OBJECTIVE

The Food and Drug Administration recently approved two percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation systems: the Ellipsys vascular access (EL) system and WavelinQ EndoAVF (WQ) system. Although the initial clinical trials of each system have demonstrated a high success rate, little detail on anatomic suitability was provided. We sought to determine the real-world applicability of the EL and WQ systems by studying them in a single representative cohort.

METHODS

All patients receiving a first-time arteriovenous access consultation at a single Veterans Affairs institution underwent extensive vein mapping of the bilateral upper extremities. Anatomic suitability was assessed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions for use (IFU), and clinical usability was determined using additional published anatomic guidelines. The suitability for radiocephalic fistula (RCF) creation was also assessed. To estimate how often these systems would be used in practice, a clinical algorithm was created, with a preference for RCF creation, followed by percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation, surgical fistula creation at the elbow, and, finally, graft placement.

RESULTS

During the study period, 116 upper extremities were measured in 58 male patients. Per the IFU, the rate of extremity suitability was 93% and 52% for the WQ and EL systems, respectively (P < .0001). In the same population, 32% of the extremities had acceptable anatomy for RCF creation. The overall clinical usability of these systems using more recent published guidelines was 55% for the WQ system and 44% for the EL system (P = .09). The usability of both pAVF systems was most limited by the size of the deep perforating cubital vein. The proximity of the antecubital perforator vein and proximal radial artery additionally limited EL usability. Based on the clinical algorithm, initial access creation would have been RCF creation for 31% of the cohort, followed by the WQ (32%), the EL (23%), surgical fistula creation at the elbow (18%), and graft placement (17%).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic suitability was greater for WQ than for EL when considering only the IFU. Once the full requirements for pAVF creation were considered, we found no significant differences in usability between the two systems. Anatomic analysis showed that pAVF creation can constitute a substantial part of a hemodialysis access practice.

Challenges and novel therapies for vascular access in haemodialysis

Advances in standards of care have extended the life expectancy of patients with kidney failure. However, options for chronic vascular access for haemodialysis - an essential part of kidney replacement therapy - have remained unchanged for decades. The high morbidity and mortality associated with current vascular access complications highlights an unmet clinical need for novel techniques in vascular access and is driving innovation in vascular access care. The development of devices, biological approaches and novel access techniques has led to new approaches to controlling fistula geometry and manipulating the underlying cellular and molecular pathways of the vascular endothelium, and influencing fistula maturation and formation through the use of external mechanical methods. Innovations in arteriovenous graft materials range from small modifications to the graft lumen to the creation of completely novel bioengineered grafts. Steps have even been taken to create new devices for the treatment of patients with central vein stenosis. However, these emerging therapies face difficult hurdles, and truly creative approaches to vascular access need resources that include well-designed clinical trials, frequent interaction with regulators, interventionalist education and sufficient funding. In addition, the heterogeneity of patients with kidney failure suggests it is unlikely that a 'one-size-fits-all' approach for effective vascular access will be feasible in the current environment.

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.