RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is likely that there will be an increasing role for early-cannulation arteriovenous grafts (ecAVG) with a wider recognition of the need to tailor vascular access to avoid futile procedures and unnecessary TCVC. However, experience of these products is not common and limited to early surgical adopters, with little information on the systemic changes and multi-disciplinary care needed to optimize outcomes. The aim of this study was to report the impact of a multi-disciplinary approach on quantifiable outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of 295 ecAVG implanted over an 8-year time-period was performed. Indicative outcomes were chosen to reflect nephrology (patient selection), nursing care (cannulation complications of infection and pseudoaneurysm) and radiology (thrombosis) on cumulative impact (functional patency) over three distinct time periods. RESULTS: The incidence of ecAVG increased 10-fold over the three time periods. The use of ecAVG changed significantly from salvage tertiary access to TCVC avoidance and salvage of existing AVF. Nursing complications reduced markedly with significantly fewer over-cannulation episodes and pseudo-aneurysms. With an improved pro-active surveillance programme, the time to first thrombosis doubled and the risk of thrombosis halved. Ultimately this resulted in significantly improved functional patency with a risk of ecAVG loss less than one-third by the last time-period. CONCLUSIONS: All aspects of ecAVG use require scrutiny and critical appraisal. Failure or success is not simply achieved by performing good technical surgery with an efficacious product, but by the care taken across a wide range of elements spanning case selection, implantation, use and maintenance.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Early cannulation arteriovenous grafts (ecAVGs) are proposed as an alternative to tunneled central venous catheters (TCVCs) in patients requiring immediate vascular access for hemodialysis (HD). We compared bacteremia rates in patients treated with ecAVG and TCVC. METHODS: The study randomized 121 adult patients requiring urgent vascular access for HD in a 1:1 fashion to receive an ecAVG with or without (+/-) an arteriovenous fistula (AVF; n = 60) or TCVC+/-AVF (n = 61). Patients were excluded if they had active systemic sepsis, no anatomically suitable vessels, or an anticipated life expectancy <3 months. The primary end point was the culture-proven bacteremia rate at 6 months, with the trial powered to detect a reduction in bacteremia from 24% to 5% (α = .05, ß = .8). Secondary end points included thrombosis, reintervention, and mortality. A cost-effectiveness analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Culture-proven bacteremia developed in 10 patients (16.4%) in the TCVC arm ≤6 months compared with two (3.3%) in the ecAVG+/-AVF arm (risk ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.56; P = .02). Mortality was also higher in the TCVC+/-AVF cohort (16% [n = 10] vs 5% [n = 3]; risk ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.08-0.45; P = .04). The difference in treatment cost between the two arms was not significant (£11,393 vs £9692; P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TCVC+/-AVF, a strategy of ecAVG+/-AVF reduced the rate of culture-proven bacteremia and mortality in patients requiring urgent vascular access for HD. The strategy also proved to be cost-neutral.
