Transposed brachiobasilic arteriovenous fistula

Ulnar-Basilic Arteriovenous Fistula for Hemodialysis Access: Utility as the "Second Procedure" after Radio Cephalic Fistula

Objectives: As per standard guidelines, the recommended order of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation for hemodialysis (HD) access is radiocephalic (RC), followed by proximal elbow fistulas and arteriovenous graft. Although ulnar-basilic (UB) fistula has been an alternative to RC-AVF, still this procedure searches clear recommendations. We present here our experience on UB-AVF as the preferred “second procedure” instead of proximal fistula after the RC-AVF.

Methods: Forty-two UB-AVF were created in nonfeasible and failed RC-AVF cases between 2016 and 2018. They were reviewed retrospectively and outcomes were compared with 480 RC-AVF constructed within the same period.

Results: The primary patency at 18 months was 73.8%, 69.6% and mean maturation time was 33.7±6.6 days, 32.1±4.7 days for UB-AVF and RC-AVF respectively (p>0.05).

Conclusion: Our altered order of preference enabled us to create all the first-time fistula in the distal forearm, providing all the advantages of distal fistula like RC-AVF and avoiding proximal fistula, improved patient convenience and short-term benefit. In an inference that may be used for references and needs support from a larger sample and longer duration study from other centers, UB-AVF may be considered as the second option after RC-AVF depending on the clinical scenario.

Outcomes of Transposition of Brachiobasilic Arteriovenous Fistula in Two-Stage Technique: A Single-Centre Experience With Literature Review

Introduction 

Arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) are considered a better option for long-term dialysis access. The distal radiocephalic AVF is the most preferred followed by proximal radiocephalic, brachiocephalic and brachiobasilic AVFs (BBAVF) with basilic vein transposition. In case of failure of AVF at other anatomical locations, BBAVF may improve the outcomes for patients needing dialysis for long term. The two-stage technique of BBAVF has easier dissection and lesser devascularisation risk. The disadvantages are need for two interventions and delay in maturation.

Materials and Method

It was a retrospective observational study including 42 patients who underwent transposition of BBAVF as two-stage procedure from June 2014 to July 2018. The data recorded were demographic characteristics, such as median age, gender, dialysis status at AVF creation and operative duration. Complications like postoperative limb oedema, bleeding and thrombosis of AVF were recorded. Patency and access outcome of AVF were documented at three-month follow-up.

Results 

Among 42 patients, 27 (64.3%) were males. The median age was 50 years. Around 14% of patients had minor complications like oedema. Eight (19%) patients needed re-exploration due to bleeding or thrombosis. The early access failure rate that is a failure before discharge was 4.7%. The patency rate at three months was 90.5%, but the primary functional rate was 74%.

Conclusion 

Transposition of BBAVF as a two-step technique is associated with reasonable patency rate and primary functional rate. The related complications were low, and a good number of fistulae could be saved with timely intervention.

Transposed Brachial-Basilic Arteriovenous Fistula for Vascular Access in Japan

As more than 320,000 patients are currently receiving hemodialysis treatment in Japan, the creation and maintenance of hemodialysis access is a major concern. The national guidelines recommend autogenous arteriovenous hemodialysis, and the brachial-basilic arteriovenous fistula has been the focus of attention, because the need for secondary, tertiary, or even more vascular access is growing. Although favorable results have been reported in terms of patency and access-related complication, this fistula involves various unsolved or controversial issues, with limitations including complex procedures, which might contribute to the lower prevalence at this point in Japan. This review addresses those issues and discusses the role of fistula in Japan.

Outcomes of relocation of basilic vein in brachiobasilic fistulas in chronic renal failure

BACKGROUND

In patients without or with injured cephalic vein, using the basilic vein for creating arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the best way for hemodialysis. In order to create AVF, the basilic vein should be superficialized and lateralized. This study sought to examine outcome of relocation of basilic vein in brachiobasilic fistulas in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF).

METHODS

We evaluated the outcome of creation of brachiobasilic fistula with transposition of basilic vein in 27 patients (14 males and 13 females with mean age of 60.03 ± 8.04 years) with CRF. The success rate and complications were recorded during the follow-up period. The fistula was regarded efficient if cannulation was feasible conveniently and a minimum flow rate of 250 ml/min for 4 h at least for 3 consecutive hemodialysis sessions through both lines was documented 30 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean time gap between previous AVF creation or try and the relocation of basilic vein was 3.55 months. Thirty days postoperatively, 85.2% of the created AVFs were efficiently working. There were postoperative complications in 40.7% of patients including venous hypertension (14.8%), bleeding (7.4%), hematoma (7.4%) and distal paresthesia (11.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Brachiobasilic AVF fistula provides a suitable option for vascular access in cases with failed previous AVF. Relocation of basilic vein for brachiobasilic AVF is technically feasible, safe and with excellent patency in short-term and complication rates are acceptable.

Surgical and Endovascular Revision of Brachio-Basilic Vein Fistula

Purpose

The brachio-basilic vein fistula (BBVF) is currently the third vascular access option for patients on hemodialysis, following radio-cephalic and brachio-cephalic arterio-venous fistulas. Like all types of hemodialysis vascular access, a variety of procedures may have to be performed in order to maintain long-term use of the BBVF. The aim of the present study was to perform a literature review of endovascular or surgical revisions of BBVFs.

Methods

On Pubmed search, 676 records were obtained and reviewed for relevance with the aim of the search.

Results

A variety of endovascular and surgical revision techniques has been described to manage BBVF poor maturation, dysfunction manifested as failing BBVF (most often the result of a stenosis at the transposed/swing segment), thrombosis, aneurysm formation and hemodialysis access-induced hand ischemia (steal syndrome). The role of revision is crucial in BBVF maintenance, taking into account that around 70% of these fistulas will require some intervention by 18 months and as a result of revision, secondary patency is preserved in the vast majority, according to the results of one study. Endovascular revision is the treatment of choice for most cases of BBVF dysfunction or thrombosis, with redo surgery reserved for failures of endovascular techniques or other specific indications.

Conclusions

BBVF revision, more often in the form of endovascular surgery, plays a crucial role in BBVF maintenance and its continued use for hemodialysis, necessary for reducing graft and catheter use and the associated morbidity.