Outcomes after endovascular mechanical thrombectomy in occluded vascular access used for dialysis purposes

PURPOSE: Endovascular mechanical thrombectomy using the AngioJet™ system can be considered to reestablish patency in occluded vascular access. The aim of this study was to review our results for endovascular mechanical thrombectomy using the AngioJet™ system in patients with arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) and arteriovenous grafts (AVG). METHODS: Data collected in a database of patients requiring hemodialysis for renal failure were analyzed. Patients who underwent endovascular mechanical thrombectomy procedures with the AngioJet™ system for occlusion of vascular access were included. Clinical and technical success rates and patency rates were calculated. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors of influence. RESULTS: A total of 92 AngioJet™ procedures in 60 patients with thrombosed vascular access were reviewed during a mean follow-up period of 21.5 months in patients with an AVF and 11.9 months in patients with an AVG. Technical and clinical success was achieved in 92.6% of AVF cases and 92.0 and 90.8% of AVG cases with an AVG, respectively. Significantly higher primary and primary-assisted patency rates were observed in the AVF group. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that left-sided vascular access and female sex were independent predictors for failure regarding primary patency in AVG patients. Immunosuppressive drugs and older age were negative predictors for secondary patency in AVG patients. CONCLUSIONS: The AngioJet™ system can be deemed an effective technique to reestablish patency in occluded vascular access with minimal use of central venous catheters for dialysis. Good technical and clinical success rates were achieved with acceptable patency rates, especially in AVF patients

Outcomes of basilic vein transposition versus polytetrafluoroethylene forearm loop graft as tertiary vascular access

Background: Radial-cephalic arteriovenous fistula and brachial-cephalic arteriovenous fistula are the first and second choices for creating vascular access in dialysis patients as recommended by the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative. Basilic vein transposition or use of a forearm (polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE]) loop graft is recommended thereafter. The aim of this study was twofold: first, to compare the outcomes and patency rates of patients treated with a basilic vein transposition with those of patients treated with a PTFE loop; and second, to identify patient-related factors of influence on patency rates. Methods: Data collected in our prospectively maintained database of patients with chronic renal dysfunction requiring hemodialysis were analyzed. From April 2006 to August 2017, there were 55 patients with a basilic vein transposition and 75 patients with a PTFE loop included. Primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency rates were calculated. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors of influence on survival. Incidence rates of complications and reinterventions were calculated and compared. Results: Mean follow-up time was 29 months. A significantly higher 2-year primary assisted patency rate was found for the basilic vein transposition group (72.7% 6 6.5% vs 47.6% 6 6.2%; P <.01). The 2-year primary patency rates and secondary patency rates were comparable between basilic vein transposition and PTFE loop (25.1% 6 6.6% vs 13.7% 6 4.4% [P = .11] and 75.5% 6 6.5% vs 73.9% 6 5.3% [P = .17], respectively). Cox regression identified body mass index (hazard ratio [HR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-2.98; P = .03) and age (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.91; P = .02) as predictors for failure regarding primary patency in PTFE loop patients. Previous catheter use (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12-0.70; P = .006) and the presence of diabetes (HR, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.50-7.39; P = .003) were independent predictors for failure regarding primary patency in basilic vein transposition patients. The incidence rate of total complications was significantly higher in the PTFE loop group with 0.70 per patient-year (PY-1) compared with 0.28 PY-1 in the basilic vein transposition group (P = .001). In terms of intervention rate, a significantly higher percutaneous transluminal angioplasty rate and surgical revision rate were found in the PTFE loop group than in the basilic vein transposition group (1.77 PY-1 vs 1.05 PY-1 [P = .022] and 0.20 PY-1 vs 0.07 PY-1 [P = .002], respectively). Conclusions: In this nonrandomized study, basilic vein transposition has better primary assisted patency, fewer complications, and fewer reinterventions compared with PTFE loop