Comparison of peripheral cutting balloon angioplasty with conventional balloon angioplasty for recurrent hemodialysis vascular access stenosis: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Journal of Vascular Access Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-23 DOI:10.1177/11297298231209489
Masaaki Murakami, Daisuke Furushima, Shingo Hamamoto, Hiroshi Yamada, Takao Okawa, Satoshi Tanaka, Kojiro Nagai
{"title":"Comparison of peripheral cutting balloon angioplasty with conventional balloon angioplasty for recurrent hemodialysis vascular access stenosis: A prospective randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Masaaki Murakami, Daisuke Furushima, Shingo Hamamoto, Hiroshi Yamada, Takao Okawa, Satoshi Tanaka, Kojiro Nagai","doi":"10.1177/11297298231209489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) and conventional balloon angioplasty (control group) for recurrent vascular access stenosis in arteriovenous fistulas.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized single-center clinical trial included patients with hemodynamically significant recurrent vascular access stenosis of an arteriovenous fistula. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess primary patency, whereas the log-rank test was used to evaluate differences in patency between groups. Functional evaluations were performed using Doppler ultrasonography.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients (<i>n</i> = 122) were randomly assigned to undergo CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty between December 2012 and November 2017. The clinical success rate was 100% in both groups. The anatomical success rates were 65% and 56% in the CBA and control groups, respectively. The primary patency of the target lesion was significantly better in the CBA group (33.3%) than in the control group (16.1%) at 6 months (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.77; <i>p</i> = 0.00171). The stenosis percentage decreased significantly after angioplasty in the CBA group (Δ-50.7%) compared with the control group (Δ-41.9%) (<i>p</i> = 0.0008). Access flow, measured using duplex Doppler ultrasonography, improved after angioplasty in both groups (300-526 ml/min in the control group and, 268-546 ml/min in the CBA group). Change in access flow (Δ + 278 ± 162) in the CBA group tended to be greater than that in the control group (Δ + 226 ± 151) (<i>p</i> = 0.07). However, the difference was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with recurrent vascular access stenosis of the arteriovenous fistula CBA is effective and superior to conventional angioplasty.</p>","PeriodicalId":56113,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Access","volume":" ","pages":"131-138"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Access","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298231209489","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) and conventional balloon angioplasty (control group) for recurrent vascular access stenosis in arteriovenous fistulas.

Materials and methods: This prospective, randomized single-center clinical trial included patients with hemodynamically significant recurrent vascular access stenosis of an arteriovenous fistula. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess primary patency, whereas the log-rank test was used to evaluate differences in patency between groups. Functional evaluations were performed using Doppler ultrasonography.

Results: Patients (n = 122) were randomly assigned to undergo CBA or conventional balloon angioplasty between December 2012 and November 2017. The clinical success rate was 100% in both groups. The anatomical success rates were 65% and 56% in the CBA and control groups, respectively. The primary patency of the target lesion was significantly better in the CBA group (33.3%) than in the control group (16.1%) at 6 months (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.77; p = 0.00171). The stenosis percentage decreased significantly after angioplasty in the CBA group (Δ-50.7%) compared with the control group (Δ-41.9%) (p = 0.0008). Access flow, measured using duplex Doppler ultrasonography, improved after angioplasty in both groups (300-526 ml/min in the control group and, 268-546 ml/min in the CBA group). Change in access flow (Δ + 278 ± 162) in the CBA group tended to be greater than that in the control group (Δ + 226 ± 151) (p = 0.07). However, the difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusion: In patients with recurrent vascular access stenosis of the arteriovenous fistula CBA is effective and superior to conventional angioplasty.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外周切割球囊成形术与常规球囊成形术治疗复发性血液透析血管通路狭窄的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。
目的:比较切开球囊成形术(CBA)与常规球囊成形术(对照组)治疗动静脉瘘复发性血管通路狭窄的疗效和安全性。材料和方法:这项前瞻性、随机、单中心临床试验纳入了血流动力学显著的复发性动静脉瘘血管通路狭窄患者。Kaplan-Meier法用于评估原发性通畅度,log-rank检验用于评估组间通畅度的差异。应用多普勒超声进行功能评估。结果:2012年12月至2017年11月期间,患者(n = 122)随机分配接受CBA或常规球囊血管成形术。两组临床成功率均为100%。CBA组和对照组的解剖成功率分别为65%和56%。6个月时,CBA组目标病变的原发性通畅率(33.3%)明显优于对照组(16.1%)(风险比为0.50;95%置信区间为0.33-0.77;p = 0.00171)。CBA组(Δ-50.7%)与对照组(Δ-41.9%)相比,血管成形术后狭窄率明显降低(p = 0.0008)。双多普勒超声测量两组血管成形术后通道流量均有所改善(对照组300-526 ml/min, CBA组268-546 ml/min)。CBA组访问流量(Δ + 278±162)的变化趋势大于对照组(Δ + 226±151)(p = 0.07)。然而,差异无统计学意义。结论:CBA治疗复发性动静脉瘘狭窄有效,优于常规血管成形术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Vascular Access
Journal of Vascular Access 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
31.60%
发文量
181
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vascular Access (JVA) is issued six times per year; it considers the publication of original manuscripts dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of vascular access. In addition reviews, case reports and clinical trials are welcome, as well as papers dedicated to more practical aspects covering new devices and techniques. All contributions, coming from all over the world, undergo the peer-review process. The Journal of Vascular Access is divided into independent sections, each led by Editors of the highest scientific level: • Dialysis • Oncology • Interventional radiology • Nutrition • Nursing • Intensive care Correspondence related to published papers is also welcome.
期刊最新文献
First successful use of translocated autologous great saphenous vein to the upper arm for hemodialysis access in Vietnam: A 3-year follow-up case report. Femoral venous access: State of the art and future perspectives. Elimination of bleeding after tunnelled catheter removal by modified technique in practice. Integrated short peripheral intravenous cannulas and risk of catheter failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Comparison of procedural time with two different ultrasound-guided approaches for dorsalis pedis artery cannulation in adult patients: A randomized trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1