Endovascular Treatment of Malfunctioning Dialysis Fistulas: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Comparing Transradial and Conventional Transvenous Access.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Pub Date : 2024-12-26 DOI:10.1002/ccd.31349
Roberto Minici, Massimo Venturini, Federico Fontana, Giuseppe Guzzardi, Federico Torre, Marco Spinetta, Andrea Coppola, Filippo Piacentino, Pasquale Guerriero, Nicola De Rosi, Biagio Apollonio, Marco Franchin, Francesco Giurazza, Luca Brunese, Domenico Laganà
{"title":"Endovascular Treatment of Malfunctioning Dialysis Fistulas: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Comparing Transradial and Conventional Transvenous Access.","authors":"Roberto Minici, Massimo Venturini, Federico Fontana, Giuseppe Guzzardi, Federico Torre, Marco Spinetta, Andrea Coppola, Filippo Piacentino, Pasquale Guerriero, Nicola De Rosi, Biagio Apollonio, Marco Franchin, Francesco Giurazza, Luca Brunese, Domenico Laganà","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31349","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Venous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.

Methods: A retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.

Results: Of 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.

Conclusions: This study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.

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
血管内治疗功能不全的透析瘘管:一项多中心回顾性分析,比较经桡动脉和常规经静脉通路。
背景:静脉流出是透析瘘血管内治疗的首选途径。然而,经桡骨通路(TRA)在特定的临床情况下具有优势。本研究旨在比较TRA和经静脉通路(TVA)在血管内治疗功能不全透析瘘管的有效性、可行性和安全性,弥补现有综合文献的空白。方法:回顾性多中心分析,包括前瞻性收集的数据(2021年1月- 2023年11月),来自接受TRA血管内治疗功能障碍透析瘘管的患者。对照组由TVA患者组成。结果:206例患者中,62例行TRA, 144例行TVA。基线人口统计数据显示了良好的匹配分布。TRA插管时间较长,但手术和透视时间相似。TRA(98.4%)和TVA(97.2%)的技术成功率都很高。临床成功率相当(96.8%对95.8%)。术后通路流量和并发症无显著差异。结论:本研究首次直接比较了TRA和TVA在功能障碍透析瘘管中的作用。虽然静脉流出仍然是治疗功能障碍透析瘘管的标准血管通路,但TRA显示出相当的疗效、安全性和可行性,使其成为特定临床情况下可行的替代方案。需要进一步的研究来证实这些发现,并确定TRA的长期持久性。
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
8.70%
发文量
419
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.
期刊最新文献
Ticagrelor Monotherapy Following Short-Term DAPT in ACS Undergoing PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Correction to "Long-Term Outcomes of DCB and DES for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Relation to the Vessel Size". Aortic Root Anatomy and Impact on New-Onset Left Bundle Branch Block After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation. Clinical Value of CT-Based 3D Computational Modeling in Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: An In-Depth Analysis of the PRECISE LAAO Study. Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging in Saphenous Vein Grafts.
×
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