Carotid endarterectomy is relatively contraindicated in patients with a hostile neck anatomy who were historically revascularized with transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS). As transcarotid ...artery revascularization (TCAR) has progressively replaced TFCAS, evidence pertaining to hostile neck anatomy and TCAR is necessary to establish its safety and feasibility in this subgroup of patients. Therefore, we analyzed the impact of a hostile neck anatomy on outcomes in patients undergoing TCAR and further compared them with those undergoing TFCAS to establish recommendations for standard of care.
All patients undergoing TCAR and TFCAS from November 2016 to June 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative database were included. Patients were characterized into two groups based on the neck anatomy. Hostile neck anatomy was defined as a history of neck radiation or prior neck surgery including prior carotid endarterectomy or radical neck dissection. Primary outcomes included technical failure, access site complications (hematoma, stenosis, infection, pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula), and stroke or death. Secondary outcomes included stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), death, and a composite end point of stroke or TIA. Patients with nonatherosclerotic or multiple lesions were excluded from the analysis. Primary analysis was performed with all patients undergoing TCAR and outcomes between patients with hostile and nonhostile neck anatomy were compared. Further analysis included a comparison of patients with a hostile neck anatomy undergoing TCAR and TFCAS. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to assess impact of hostile neck anatomy on postoperative outcomes. Results were adjusted for relevant potential confounders including age, gender, race, degree of stenosis, symptomatic status, comorbidities, preoperative medications, anesthesia type, and protamine use.
Among the 19,859 patients who underwent TCAR during the study period, 3636 (18.3%) had a hostile neck anatomy. On univariate analysis, both groups had comparable outcomes except for higher rates of stroke or death in patients with hostile neck anatomy. After adjusting for potential confounders, there were no differences in technical failure (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.59-2.21; P = .699), stroke (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58-1.28; P = .464), death (aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39-1.71; P = .598), and MI (aOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.71-1.97; P = .518). However, patients with hostile neck were at a 30% increased risk of access site complications (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6; P = .023). Further adjusted analysis comparing the outcomes in TFCAS and TCAR among patients with hostile neck anatomy showed an almost four-fold increase in risk of death (aOR, 3.77; 95% CI, 1.49-9.53; P = .005) and technical failure (aOR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.82-7.47; P < .001) among patients undergoing treatment with TFCAS.
Patients with a hostile neck anatomy undergoing TCAR experienced an increased risk of access site complications; however, the risk for technical failure and postoperative stroke/death, stroke, TIA, MI, or death was similar among both groups. TFCAS was associated with significant increase in the risk of death and technical failure compared with TCAR in this group of patients. These results confirm that TCAR should be the preferred minimally invasive revascularization procedure for patients with hostile neck anatomy.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Significant research efforts have been made to improve the safety and efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in treating abdominal aortic aneurysm. This study aimed to examine the trends of ...perioperative outcomes of EVAR in the recent decade using a national validated database.
Patients who underwent EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2006 and 2015 were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and divided into early (2006-2010) and late (2011-2015) periods. The primary outcome of the study was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay, and 30-day major complications (renal, cardiopulmonary, and wound infection).
A total of 30,076 patients were identified, with 11,539 in the early period and 18,537 in the late period. The 30-day mortality was kept at a low level in both periods (1.2% vs 1.2%; P = .98), whereas both the mean operation time (155.5 ± 72.6 minutes vs 141.9 ± 73.7 minutes; P < .001) and length of hospital stay (3.24 ± 5.32 days vs 2.81 ± 4.30 days; P < .001) were decreased in the late period. The 30-day major complication rate was reduced by 19.6% (5.1% vs 4.1%; P < .0001), with decreased renal failure (1.4% vs 1.0%; P = .003), cardiopulmonary complications (2.2% vs 1.7%; P = .006), and wound complications (2.5% vs 1.8%; P < .001). All the decreasing trends of mortality, any 30-day complication, and each type of major complication were statistically significant. Being treated in the late period was independently associated with decreased 30-day major complications (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.87; P < .001), and this effect was confirmed in the propensity score-matched cohort (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.90; P < .001).
Although the 30-day mortality remains similar, postoperative complications in EVAR have decreased significantly during the recent decade. The continuous improvement in endograft technology and surgical skills has resulted in decreased operative time, marked reduction in surgical complications, and shorter hospital length of stay after endovascular repair.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is comprised of carotid artery stent placement with cerebral protection via proximal carotid artery clamping and reversal of ...cerebral arterial flow. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TCAR performed by a broad group of physicians with variable TCAR experience.
METHODS:The ROADSTER 2 study is a prospective, open label, single arm, multicenter, postapproval registry for patients undergoing TCAR. Patients considered at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy with symptomatic stenosis ≥50% or asymptomatic stenosis ≥80% were included. The primary end point was procedural success, which encompassed technical success plus the absence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within the 30-day postoperative period. Secondary end points included technical success and individual/composite rates of stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI). All patients underwent independent neurological assessments before the procedure, within 24 hours, and at 30 days after TCAR. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated all major adverse events.
RESULTS:Between 2015 and 2019, 692 patients (Intent to Treat Population) were enrolled at 43 sites. Sixty cases had major protocol violations, leaving 632 patients adhering to the Food and Drug Administration-approved protocol (per-protocol population). The majority (81.2%) of operators were TCAR naïve before study initiation. Patients underwent TCAR for neurological symptoms in 26% of cases, and all patients had high-risk factors for carotid endarterectomy (anatomic-related 44%; physiological 32%; both 24%). Technical success occurred in 99.7% of all cases. The primary end point of procedural success rate in the Intent to Treat population was 96.5% (per-protocol 97.9%). The early postoperative outcomes in the Intent to Treat population included stroke in 13 patients (1.9%), death in 3 patients (0.4%), and MI in 6 patients (0.9%). The composite 30-day stroke/death rate was 2.3%, and stroke/death/MI rate was 3.2%. In the per-protocol population, there were strokes in 4 patients (0.6%), death in one patient (0.2%), and MI in 6 patients (0.9%) leading to a composite 30-day stroke/death rate of 0.8% and stroke/death/MI rate of 1.7%.
CONCLUSIONS:TCAR results in excellent early outcomes with high technical success combined with low rates of postprocedure stroke and death. These results were achieved by a majority of operators new to this technology at the start of the trial. Adherence to the study protocol and peri-procedural antiplatelet therapy optimizes outcomes. Longer-term follow-up data are needed to confirm these early outcomes.
REGISTRATION:URLhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifierNCT02536378.
AbstractObjectiveBowel ischemia (BI) is a serious complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. We sought to identify the incidence and risk factors associated with the development of ...postoperative BI and the post-BI outcomes for patients undergoing open aortic repair (OAR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of AAAs. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted for all patients who had undergone OAR or EVAR from 2003 to 2017 using the Vascular Quality Initiative database. Univariate (Student's t test, χ2, median) and multivariable (logistic regression) analyses were used to identify independent factors associated with postoperative BI and compare the post-BI in-hospital outcomes and mortality. ResultsWe identified 45,474 patients who had undergone infrarenal AAA repair (OAR, 21.5%; EVAR, 78.5%). The overall incidence of postoperative BI was 1.9% (OAR, 6.2% vs EVAR, 0.8%; P < .001). OAR was associated with a threefold increased odds of BI compared with EVAR (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 3.24; 95% confidence interval CI, 2.49-4.22; P < .001). The independent factors associated with BI after OAR included older age (aOR per year of age, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03), congestive heart failure (aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.05-1.98), and ruptured aneurysm (aOR, 4.16; 95% CI, 2.98-5.81; P < .01 for all). We also found that transfusion ≥1 U (aOR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.30-2.20), a transperitoneal approach (aOR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.87), supraceliac clamping (aOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.08-2.33), and inferior mesenteric artery reimplantation (aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.89) were associated with greater odds of BI after OAR ( P < .01 for all). Similarly, we found that ruptured aneurysms, a longer operative time, and transfusion of ≥1 U of blood were associated with BI after EVAR ( P < .001 for all). For both OAR and EVAR, the postoperative stay (median, 13 days interquartile range (IQR), 7-26 days vs 7 days IQR, 5-10 days and 11 days IQR, 4-23 days vs 1 day IQR, 1-3 days, respectively) and 30-day mortality (35.0% vs 6.4% and 40.5% vs 1.9%, respectively) were significantly higher for patients with BI ( P < .001 for all). The predictors of mortality for patients with BI were surgical management (aOR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.28-3.30), older age (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07), symptomatic aneurysm (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.60-2.62), ruptured aneurysm (aOR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.43-3.48), longer operative time (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.22), and postoperative renal complications (aOR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.80-4.96; P < .05 for all). ConclusionsConfirming the results from previous studies, we found that BI is more common after a ruptured aneurysm and OAR. Other associated intraoperative factors included a transperitoneal approach, supraceliac clamping, and a reimplanted inferior mesenteric artery. More than one third of patients who developed postoperative BI in our cohort had died within 30 days after AAA repair. The factors associated with mortality after BI included surgical management and postoperative renal failure. A high index of suspicion for the signs and symptoms of BI should be maintained postoperatively for patients presenting with the risk factors identified.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the gold-standard method of carotid revascularization in symptomatic patients with ≥50% and in asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Transfemoral carotid artery ...stenting (TFCAS) has been associated with higher perioperative stroke rates compared to CEA in several studies. On the other hand, transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has outperformed TFCAS in patients who are considered high risk for surgery. There is increasing data that supports TCAR as a safe and efficient technique with outcomes similar to those of CEA, but additional level-one studies are necessary to evaluate the long-term outcomes of TCAR in high- and standard-risk patients.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Anemia is associated with increased cardiac adverse events during the early postoperative period because of high physiologic stress and increased cardiac demand. The aim of this study was to assess ...the surgical outcomes and prognostic implications of anemia in patients undergoing repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).
A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent open aortic repair (OAR) or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative database (2008-2017) was performed. Patients with preoperative polycythemia, patients with ruptured aneurysms, and patients transfused with >4 units of packed red blood cells were excluded. Hemoglobin levels were categorized into three groups: moderate-severe anemia (<10 g/dL), mild anemia (10-12 g/dL in women and 10-13 g/dL in men), and no anemia (>12 g/dL in women and >13 g/dL in men). Multivariate logistic models and coarsened exact matching were used to analyze the association between anemia and 30-day mortality and between anemia and major in-hospital complications after OAR and EVAR.
A total of 34,397 patients were identified undergoing AAA repair. Of those, 28.5% had mild anemia and 4.3% had moderate-severe anemia. In both OAR (n = 6112) and EVAR (n = 28,285), patients with moderate-severe anemia had significantly higher rates of in-hospital adverse events, such as in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, renal and respiratory complications, and reoperation, compared with patients with mild or no anemia. They also had higher rates of 30-day mortality. After multivariate analysis and 1:1 coarsened exact matching, no association was found between anemia and 30-day mortality and other in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing OAR. On the other hand, in EVAR, moderate-severe anemia was associated with 2.7 times the odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio OR, 2.65; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.69-4.18), 2.5 times the odds of renal complications (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.78-3.43; P < .05), and twice the risk of acute congestive heart failure (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.18-3.25) and respiratory complications (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.26-3.19). Mild anemia was also associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality and renal and respiratory complications in patients undergoing EVAR. Interestingly, preoperative blood transfusion in mildly anemic patients undergoing EVAR was associated with double the odds of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (stroke, death, and myocardial infarction; OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.38-3.11; P < .001).
Preoperative anemia is associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality and in-hospital adverse outcomes after EVAR but not after OAR. These findings highlight the need to incorporate anemia into the preoperative risk assessment of patients undergoing EVAR. Future studies are needed to assess the efficacy of medical therapies in improving postoperative outcomes in anemic patients undergoing AAA repair.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
The use of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has superseded that of open aneurysm repair (OAR) as the procedure of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. However, significant ...rates of late reintervention and aneurysm rupture have been reported after EVAR, resulting in the need for conversion to OAR (C-OAR). To assess the relative effects of C-OAR on patients, we compared the outcomes of these patients to those of patients who had undergone P-OAR.
The data from all patients who had undergone C-OAR and P-OAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database from 2003 to 2018 were queried. Multivariable logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to assess the perioperative long-term outcomes.
A total of 4763 patients were included (91.4%, P-OAR; 8.6%, C-OAR). C-OAR was associated with a significant increase in the odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.1-2.7; P = .027) and renal complications (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2; P = .004) vs P-OAR. At 5 years, conversion was associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9; P < .001), aneurysmal rupture (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1; P = .007), and reintervention (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.05-1.97; P = .022) compared with P-OAR. These results also persisted at 10 years, with conversion associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P < .001), rupture (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8; P = .018), and reintervention (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = .010).
The results from the present study have demonstrated that C-OAR is associated with a significantly higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with P-OAR. We found a significant increase in mortality, aneurysm rupture, and reintervention at 5 and 10 years of follow-up.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Carotid endarterectomy practice patterns, including the use of shunts and cerebral monitoring techniques, are typically surgeon-dependent and differ greatly on a national level. Prior literature ...evaluating these techniques is often underpowered for detecting variations in low-frequency outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate current carotid endarterectomy practice patterns and to allow comparison across surgical approaches using a large national database.
We divided carotid cases entered into the Vascular Quality Initiative database between October 2012 and April 2015 into routine shunting, selective shunting, and never shunting cohorts, excluding endarterectomies performed with concomitant procedures and those with incomplete information on the use of a shunt. The selective group was subdivided into cases with awake, electroencephalography, and stump pressure monitoring. We evaluated differences in practice patterns and compared rates of stroke, death, return to the operating room, reperfusion injury, and re-exploration after closure across these groups. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusting for risk factors were used to identify predictors of each outcome.
Between October 2012 and April 2015, there were a total of 28,457 endarterectomies included in our analysis, of which 14,128 involved routine shunting, 1740 involved never shunting, and 12,489 involved selective shunting. Of the selective cases, 6144 involved electroencephalography monitoring, 2310 involved stump pressure monitoring, and 2052 involved awake monitoring. Unadjusted rates of in-hospital death and stroke were 0.30% (95% confidence interval CI, 0.21-0.39) and 0.78% (95% CI, 0.64-0.93) for routine shunting and 0.22% (95% CI, 0.14-0.31) and 0.91% (95% CI, 0.75-1.08) for selective shunting, respectively. The unadjusted rate of in-hospital death was lower in the awake monitoring group than in the routine shunting group (0.05% vs 0.30%; P = .037). After adjustment for patient risk factors, the multivariate models showed no difference in rates of any primary outcomes among the groups, although there was a shorter postoperative length of stay for the awake monitoring group compared with the routine shunting group (1.55 days vs 2.00 days, respectively; P < .01).
Analysis of the Vascular Quality Initiative registry shows equivalent unadjusted rates of in-hospital death and stroke across different approaches to shunting and cerebral monitoring with the exception of the awake monitoring group, which has lower unadjusted mortality compared with the routine shunting group. In the risk-adjusted analysis, however, there are no differences across any of the groups. Given the clinical equivalence of approaches to shunting and cerebral monitoring, further work should evaluate the relative cost of these techniques.
Display omitted
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a suitable alternative to open aortic surgery especially for older patients with poor general health and functional status. However, data on the benefit ...of TEVAR in elderly patients are limited. The aim of this study was to use a large national database to compare the outcomes of TEVAR in octogenarians vs nonoctogenarians in the treatment of thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissection.
All patients who underwent TEVAR for nonruptured thoracic aneurysms or dissection (zones 1-5) between January 2014 and February 2019 were identified in the Vascular Quality Initiative database. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiac adverse events; neurologic events; respiratory complications; new-onset dialysis; leg compartment syndrome; postoperative hematoma in addition to spinal, bowel, arm, and leg emboli/ischemia; and return to the operating room. Outcomes were compared between octogenarians (age ≥80 years) and nonoctogenarians (age <80 years) using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.
A total of 2042 patients were identified, including 390 octogenarians (19.1%). Compared with nonoctogenarians, octogenarians had higher percentages of females (49.5% vs 40.4%; P < .01) and White patients (75.9% vs 68.6%; P < .01) and were more likely to present with thoracic aneurysms (86.2% vs 64.3%; P < .001). They also had larger aortic diameters (maximum diameter, 60.3 ± 15.8 mm vs 53.4 ± 17.4 mm), less proximal disease zones (zone 1, 3.3% vs 5.5%; zone 2, 13.9% vs 24.1%; P < .001) and were more likely to undergo the procedure under local/regional anesthesia (5.4% vs 2.4%; P < .01) compared with patients less than 80 years of age. No association was observed between octogenarians and in-hospital mortality after TEVAR for aneurysms (5.1% vs 3.3%; odds ratio OR, 1.38; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.72-2.61; P = .33) or dissection (5.6% vs 4.9%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.14-3.32; P = .63). However, for thoracic aneurysm repair, octogenarians had a 44% higher adjusted odds of in-hospital complications (27.4% vs 20.7%; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.04-1.98; P = .03) compared with their younger counterparts. In-hospital complications (27.8% vs 26.2%; P = .79; OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.50-2.11; P = .95) were similar in octogenarians undergoing endovascular repair for dissections of the thoracic aorta. Octogenarians were also associated with 1.74 times the mortality hazard compared with nonoctogenarians (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.18-2.58; P = .01).
TEVAR is an acceptable treatment option for octogenarians who have aortic arch and descending aortic aneurysms or dissections (zones 1-5). However, in case of aneurysms, they might be at a higher risk of in-hospital complications. Octogenarians also had increased hazard of 1-year mortality; however, the exact cause of this mortality could not be deciphered. Our findings suggest that elderly patients should not be denied TEVAR based on age if they are medically and anatomically fit for this procedure.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
30.
Vascular access for hemodialysis in the elderly Arhuidese, Isibor J.; Cooper, Michol A.; Rizwan, Muhammad ...
Journal of vascular surgery,
February 2019, 2019-Feb, 2019-02-00, 20190201, Volume:
69, Issue:
2
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) with arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) in a large population-based cohort of elderly patients in the United States.
...A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients ≥75 years old in the prospectively maintained United States Renal Database System who had an AVF or AVG placed for hemodialysis (HD) access between January 2007 and December 2011. Outcomes were mortality, conduit patency, maturation, time to catheter-free dialysis, and infection. A χ2 test, Student t-test, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and multivariable Cox regression analysis were employed.
Of the 124,421 patients studied, there were 19,173 (15%) AVF initiates, 4480 (4%) AVG initiates, 29,872 (24%) AVF converts, 10,712 (9%) AVG converts, and 59,824 (48%) patients who persisted on HD catheters. Compared with AVF initiates, relative mortality was significantly higher for AVG initiates (adjusted hazard ratio aHR, 1.24; P < .001), AVF converts (aHR, 1.36; P < .001), AVG converts (aHR, 1.62; P < .001), and catheter-persistent patients (aHR, 2.23; P < .001). Primary patency (aHR, 1.21; P < .001) and primary assisted patency (aHR, 1.31; P < .001) were higher for AVF. Secondary patency was higher for AVGs within the first 4 months (aHR, 1.12; P < .001) but higher for AVFs beyond that time point (aHR, 1.25; P < .001). Maturation rate and median time to maturation were 80% vs 84% (P < .001) and 46 vs 26 days (P < .001) for AVF vs AVG.
Pre-emptive AVF remains the best mode of HD in elderly patients who can tolerate surgery. Patients who cannot tolerate pre-emptive surgery or have to initiate HD on an urgent basis with a catheter should convert to AVF when it is feasible if life expectancy is >4 months. If life expectancy is <4 months, surgical risk and quality of life should be considered in making the decision to persistently dialyze through HD catheter or to convert to AVG.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
PDF
