Cephalic arch stenosis: angioplasty to preserve a brachiocephalic fistula or new brachiobasilic fistula? A cost-effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repeat angioplasty versus new brachiobasilic fistula (BBF) in patients with symptomatic cephalic arch stenosis (CAS). METHODS: Patients presenting with symptomatic CAS (n = 22) underwent angioplasty. They were compared to patients undergoing BBF creation (n = 51). Primary outcomes were functional primary arteriovenous fistulae patency at 3, 6 and 12 months. Data were collected on number of interventions, alternative accesses and hospital days for access-related complications. Quality of life was assessed using Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36 scores. Decision tree, Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis permitted cost-utility analysis. Healthcare costs were derived from Department of Health figures and are presented as cost (£)/patient/year, cost/access preserved and cost/quality of life-adjusted year (QALY) for each of the treatment strategies. RESULTS: Functional primary patency rates at 3, 6, 12 months were 87.5%, 81% and 43% for repeated angioplasty and 78%, 63% and 41% for BBF. The angioplasty cohort required 1.64 ± 0.23 angioplasties/patient and 0.64 ± 0.34 lines/patient. BBF required 0.36 ± 0.12 angioplasties/patient and 1.2 ± 0.2 lines/patient. Patients in the BBF cohort spent an additional 0.9 days/year in hospital due to access-related complications. Mean cost/patient/year in the angioplasty group was £5247.72/patient/year versus £3807.55/patient/year in the BBF cohort. Mean cost per access saved was £11,544.98 (angioplasty) versus £4979.10 (BBF). Average cost per QALY was £13,809.79 (angioplasty) versus £10,878.72 per QALY (BBF). CONCLUSIONS: CAS poses a difficult management problem with poor outcomes from conventional angioplasty. Optimal management will depend on patient factors, local outcomes and expertise, but consideration should be given to creation of a new BBF as a cost-effective means to manage this difficult problem.

Early cannulation prosthetic graft (Acuseal) for arteriovenous access: a useful option to provide a personal vascular access solution.

PURPOSE: Early cannulation arteriovenous grafts (ecAVGs), such as the GORE Acuseal, have "low bleed" properties permitting cannulation within 24 hours of insertion. They may provide an alternative to tunneled central venous catheters (and associated line complications) in patients requiring urgent vascular access. METHODS: We present our early experience of 37 patients treated with the GORE Acuseal ecAVG. RESULTS: A total of 11 upper limb, 24 lower limb and 2 complex graft procedures were performed. Indications for ecAVG were as follows: bridge to transplantation (21.6%); bridge to arteriovenous fistula (AVF) maturation (8.1%); AVF salvage (8.1%); no native options (67.6%, including 17 patients with bilateral central vein stenosis); 36 AVGs (97.3%) were successfully cannulated. Mean time to first cannulation: 30.4±23.4 hours (range: 2-192). Primary and secondary patency rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were 64.9%, 48.6%, 32.4% and 70.2%, 59.4%, 40.5% respectively. The systemic bacteremia rate was 0.2 per 1,000 access days. There was one perioperative death. Other complications included hematoma at cannulation sites (n=9), pseudoaneurysm (n=3) and local infection at graft site (n=6). A total of 26 of 37 patients (70.6%) achieved a "personal vascular access solution": bridge to transplantation (n=8), bridge to functioning AVF/interposition AVG (n=5), maintenance hemodialysis via ecAVG (n=13); death with functioning AVG (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: Early experience with the GORE Acuseal is encouraging. Patency and bacteremia rates are at least comparable to standard polytetrafluoroethylene grafts. ecAVGs have permitted cannulation within 24 hours of insertion and line avoidance in the majority of patients. Nearly three-quarters of patients achieved a definitive "personal vascular access solution" from their ecAVG.

Observational study of intra-abdominal pressure monitoring in acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) is predictive of adverse outcome in critically ill patients; however, its role in acute pancreatitis is unclear, and prospective studies are lacking. We aimed to determine the overall incidence and predictive value of IAH on mortality in acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Transvesical IAP was measured on admission and every 4 hours within high-dependency unit/intensive care unit. Serum biochemistry and physiologic parameters permitted calculation of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Imrie, and Ranson scores. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 218 patients with acute pancreatitis were recruited; 30-day mortality was greater in patients with IAH (IAP ≥12 mmHg; 37%) than no IAH (2%; P < .001). A total of 14% of patients had IAH on admission; another 3% developed IAH in hospital. Mortality was greater in the latter group (37% vs 50%; P < .01). In the majority of cases IAH developed in line with other organ failure; however, there were several patients in whom the development of IAH appeared to be the sentinel event before rapid clinical decline. An IAP threshold of 9 mmHg had best predictive value for mortality (sensitivity 86%, specificity 87%; area under the ROC curve 0.91). This finding was comparable with other validated markers of severe pancreatitis (Imrie ≥3: sensitivity 51%, specificity 70%; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II: sensitivity 67%, specificity 96%; C-reactive protein >150: sensitivity 89%, specificity 83%). CONCLUSION: IAP is a good predictor of mortality and organ failure in acute pancreatitis and compares favorably with other validated prognostic scores. Whether IAH is a phenomenon causative of organ failure or an epiphenomenon, occurring in conjunction with other organ dysfunction, remains unclear.

The use of tunneled central venous catheters: inevitable or system failure?

PURPOSE: To evaluate reasons for tunneled central venous catheter (TCVC) usage in our prevalent hemodialysis population and assess the impact of a surgically aggressive approach to definitive access creation. METHODS: Clinical review of all patients in the West of Scotland dialyzing via a TCVC in November 2010 was performed. Reasons for TCVC usage and TCVC complications were evaluated. Over the subsequent year, aggressive intervention was undertaken to achieve definitive access in all suitable patients and outcomes re-evaluated a year later (November 2011). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients dialyzing via a TCVC in 2010 compared to 2011 (30.3% (n=193) vs. 31.7% (n=201), respectively; p=0.56). All patients now have a "vascular access plan." Of patients dialyzing via a TCVC in 2010, 37% had died by 2011, 22% remained on long-term line, 20% had successful arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation, 1% had an arteriovenous graft and 2% were transplanted; 10.4% developed complications of vascular access and required ligation of a functioning AVF. A further 6.5% died within 28 days of surgery. The incidence of culture-positive Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia was 1.6 per 1,000 catheter days. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive strategies of AVF creation resulted in one-fifth of patients on a long-term TCVC having successful creation of an AVF. This was offset against high failure and significant complication rate from AVF creation in this population. One-third of patients dialyzing via a TCVC died in the subsequent year. Correct patient selection for AVF creation is essential and predialysis care must be optimized to avoid the need for TCVCs entirely.