Spontaneous celiac artery aneurysms in 13-year-old and 10-year-old brothers with PLOD1-related kyphoscoliotic Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.

PLOD1-related kyphoscoliotic Ehlers-Danlos syndrome is a rare, autosomal recessive connective tissue disorder characterized by congenital hypotonia, early-onset, progressive kyphoscoliosis, and generalized joint hypermobility. PLOD1-kyphoscoliotic Ehlers-Danlos syndrome is also associated with heightened vascular fragility, resulting in an elevated susceptibility to recurrent vascular complications such as arterial aneurysms, dissection, and spontaneous arterial rupture. We report the cases of two affected brothers: a 13-year-old boy presenting with spontaneous rupture of a celiac artery aneurysm and a 10-year-old boy presenting with a rapidly enlarging celiac artery aneurysm requiring urgent repair.

How I treat nutcracker syndrome.

Anatomic compression of the left renal vein in the angle between the aorta and superior mesenteric artery may be asymptomatic or may result in symptoms, including flank pain, hematuria, or pelvic pain and/or congestion. Patients can be referred to a vascular surgeon due to symptoms and/or radiologic findings. Because symptoms of nutcracker syndrome can be vague and/or nondiagnostic, careful evaluation, assessment, and counseling with patients are required before undertaking intervention, which is often an open surgical procedure. The definitive diagnosis is ideally confirmed with diagnostic venography, including pressure measurements from the left renal vein and inferior vena cava. The optimal treatment includes open decompression of the left renal vein with renal vein transposition or gonadal vein transposition, with or without concomitant management of pelvic varicosities if symptomatic. Because most patients with nutcracker syndrome are young, long-term follow-up with scheduled ultrasound examinations should be maintained.

The Aortic Team Model and Collaborative Decision Pathways for the Management of Complex Aortic Disease: Clinical Practice Update From the Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons/Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery/Canadian Association for Interventional Radiology.

Disease of the aortic arch, descending thoracic, or thoracoabdominal aorta necessitates dedicated expertise across medical, endovascular, and surgical specialties. Cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, and others have expertise and skills that aid in the management of patients with complex aortic disease. No specialty is uniformly expert in all aspects of required care. Because of this dispersion of expertise across specialties, an aortic team model approach to decision-making and treatment is advocated. A nonhierarchical partnership across specialties within an interdisciplinary aortic clinic ensures that all treatment options are considered and promotes shared decision-making between the patient and all aortic experts. Furthermore, regionalization of care for aortic disease of increased complexity assures that the breadth of treatment options is available and that favourable volume-outcome ratios for high-risk procedures are maintained. An awareness of best practice care pathways for patient referrals for preventative management, acute care scenarios, chronic care scenarios, and pregnancy might facilitate a more organized management schema for aortic disease across Canada and improve lifelong surveillance initiatives.

Current Approaches for Mesenteric Ischemia and Visceral Aneurysms.

This article provides an overview of acute mesenteric ischemia, chronic mesenteric ischemia, and visceral aneurysms, with a focus on treatment. Acute mesenteric ischemia can be a challenging diagnosis. Early recognition and adequate revascularization are key to patient outcomes. Chronic mesenteric ischemia is a more insidious process, typically caused by atherosclerosis. Various options for revascularization exist, which must be tailored to each patient. Visceral aneurysms are rare and the natural history is not well defined. However, given the risk of rupture and high mortality, treatment may be complex.

Systematic and scoping reviews: A comparison and overview.

In this article, we compare and contrast methods of reviewing, summarizing, and synthesizing the literature, including systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and narrative reviews. Review articles are essential to help investigators wade through the plethora of exponentially growing medical literature. In the era of evidence-based medicine, a systematic approach is required. A systematic review is a formalized method to address a specific clinical question by analyzing the breadth of published literature while minimizing bias. Systematic reviews are designed to answer narrow clinical questions in the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) format. Alternatively, scoping reviews use a similar systematic approach to a literature search in order to determine the breadth and depth of knowledge on a topic; to clarify definitions, concepts, and themes; or sometimes as a precursor to a systematic review or hypothesis generator to guide future research. However, scoping reviews are less constrained by a priori decisions about which interventions, controls, and outcomes may be of interest. Traditional narrative reviews still have a role in informing practice and guiding research, particularly when there is a paucity of high-quality evidence on a topic.

Results of the North American Complex Abdominal Aortic Debranching (NACAAD) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid debranching repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms was initially designed as a better alternative to standard open repair, addressing the limitations of endovascular repair involving the visceral aorta. We reviewed the collective outcomes of hybrid debranching repairs using extra-anatomic, open surgical debranching of the renal-mesenteric arteries, followed by endovascular aortic stenting. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent hybrid repair in 14 North American institutions during 10 years were retrospectively reviewed. Society of Vascular Surgery scores were used to assess comorbidity risk. Early and late outcomes, including mortality, morbidity, reintervention, and patency were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients (118 male; mean age, 71±8 years old) were treated by hybrid repair with extraanatomic reconstruction of 657 renal and mesenteric arteries (mean 3.2 vessels/patient). Mean aneurysm diameter was 6.6±1.3 cm. Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms were identified in 163 (78%) patients and pararenal aneurysms in 45 (22%). A single-stage repair was performed in 92 (44%) patients. The iliac arteries were the most common source of inflow (n=132; 63%), and most (n=150; 72%) had 3 or more bypasses. There were 30 (14%) early deaths, ranging widely across sites (0%-21%). A Society of Vascular Surgery comorbidity score >15 was the primary predictor of early mortality (P<0.01), whereas mortality was 3% in a score ≤9. Early complications occurred in 140 (73%) patients and included respiratory complications in 45 patients (22%) and spinal cord ischemia in 22 (11%), of whom 10 (45%) fully recovered. At 5 years, survival was 61±5%, primary graft patency was 90±2%, and secondary patency was 93±2%. The most significant predictor of late mortality was renal insufficiency (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after hybrid repair and visceral debranching is highly variable by center, but strongly affected by preoperative comorbidities and the centers' experience with the technique. With excellent graft patency at 5 years, the outcomes of hybrid repair done at centers of excellence and in carefully selected patients may be comparable (or better) than traditional open or even totally endovascular approaches. However, in patients already considered as high-risk for surgery, it may not offer better outcomes.

Popliteal entrapment syndrome-The case for a new classification.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability of the current classification system for popliteal entrapment syndrome to accurately capture all patients, and if not, to design an all-inclusive new classification. METHODS: Retrospective review of all interventions performed for popliteal entrapment syndrome between 1994 and 2013 at our institution was performed. Preoperative imaging and intraoperative findings were used to establish the compressive morphology of popliteal entrapment syndrome. Patients were categorized, when possible, into six types of the current classification system (Rich classification, modified by Levien) and into seven types of a new classification. RESULTS: Sixty-seven limbs of 49 patients were operated on for unilateral (31) or bilateral (18) popliteal entrapment syndrome. The current classification system captured the anatomy of only 43 (64%) of 67 limbs with popliteal entrapment syndrome. Compressive morphologies without a defined class included aberrant insertion of the lateral head of gastrocnemius muscle, muscle slip originating from the lateral head of gastrocnemius or hamstrings, hypertrophied hamstring muscle, abnormal fibrous bands, perivascular connective tissue, and prominent lateral femoral condyle. The new classification captured 100% of the limbs with popliteal entrapment syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Current classification of popliteal entrapment syndrome is inadequate as more than one-third of the cases reviewed fell outside of the standard classification system. Consideration of a more inclusive new anatomic classification system is warranted.

Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines for management of extracranial cerebrovascular disease.

Management of carotid bifurcation stenosis in stroke prevention has been the subject of extensive investigations, including multiple randomized controlled trials. The proper treatment of patients with carotid bifurcation disease is of major interest to vascular surgeons and other vascular specialists. In 2011, the Society for Vascular Surgery published guidelines for the treatment of carotid artery disease. At the time, several randomized trials, comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), were reported. Since the 2011 guidelines, several studies and a few systematic reviews comparing CEA and CAS have been reported, and the role of medical management has been reemphasized. In the present publication, we have updated and expanded on the 2011 guidelines with specific emphasis on five areas: (1) is CEA recommended over maximal medical therapy for low-risk patients; (2) is CEA recommended over transfemoral CAS for low surgical risk patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of >50%; (3) the timing of carotid intervention for patients presenting with acute stroke; (4) screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and (5) the optimal sequence of intervention for patients with combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A separate implementation document will address other important clinical issues in extracranial cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations are made using the GRADE (grades of recommendation assessment, development, and evaluation) approach, as was used for other Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines. The committee recommends CEA as the first-line treatment for symptomatic low-risk surgical patients with stenosis of 50% to 99% and asymptomatic patients with stenosis of 70% to 99%. The perioperative risk of stroke and death in asymptomatic patients must be <3% to ensure benefit for the patient. In patients with recent stable stroke (modified Rankin scale score, 0-2), carotid revascularization is considered appropriate for symptomatic patients with >50% stenosis and should be performed as soon as the patient is neurologically stable after 48 hours but definitely <14 days after symptom onset. In the general population, screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in patients without cerebrovascular symptoms or significant risk factors for carotid artery disease is not recommended. In selected asymptomatic patients with an increased risk of carotid stenosis, we suggest screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis as long as the patients would potentially be fit for and willing to consider carotid intervention if significant stenosis is discovered. For patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% to 99%, who require both CEA and coronary artery bypass grafting, we suggest CEA before, or concomitant with, coronary artery bypass grafting to potentially reduce the risk of stroke and stroke/death. The sequencing of the intervention depends on the clinical presentation and institutional experience.

Onyx versus coil embolization for the treatment of type II endoleaks.

OBJECTIVE: Little evidence is available supporting the optimal treatment of type II endoleaks associated with aortic sac growth. Previous studies have lacked comparisons between treatment methods and long-term follow-up. The purpose of the present study was to review our center's experience with the treatment of type II endoleaks comparing Onyx (a liquid embolization agent consisting of ethylene vinyl alcohol; Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn) embolization and coil embolization. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a vascular surgery database was performed to identify all patients who had undergone embolization of a type II endoleak for aortic sac growth after endovascular aneurysm repair from 2005 to 2018. The Onyx and coil embolization groups were compared using univariate statistics. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients had undergone 77 embolization procedures for type II endoleaks with either Onyx (27 patients; 37 procedures) or coils (31 patients; 40 procedures). The average aneurysm size at embolization was larger in the Onyx group (77.9 ± 15.1 mm) compared with coil embolization (73.4 ± 11.9 mm). The mean follow-up was 57 months for the Onyx group and 74 months for the coil embolization group. Of the 27 patients who had undergone Onyx embolization, 2 (7.4%) had required graft explantation compared with 5 of the 31 patients (16.1%) who had undergone coil embolization (P = .33). The results of the per-patient analysis showed that the coil embolization group had a significantly greater rate of the need for further reintervention compared with the Onyx group (55% vs 19%; P < .01). Clinical success was observed in 13 patients (48%) in the Onyx embolization group compared with 10 patients (32%) in the coil embolization group (P = .04). Two patients in each group had presented with secondary rupture of the aneurysm sac after attempted embolization. CONCLUSIONS: Type II endoleaks associated with sac growth treated with Onyx were less likely to require further reinterventions than were those treated with coil embolization. A trend was found toward a greater need for endovascular aneurysm repair explant after coil embolization. With a high rate of further reintervention and potential for sac rupture, diligent follow-up is required after attempted type II embolization, regardless of the technique used.

Outcomes Following Inferior Mesenteric Artery Reimplantation During Elective Aortic Aneurysm Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The role of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) reimplantation during open aortic reconstruction is debated. We assessed outcomes after inferior mesenteric artery reimplantation (IMAR) for aortic aneurysmal disease to help shed light on this question. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of all IMARs performed during open aortic surgery over a 10-year period between 2000 and 2009 was carried out. The primary outcome was patency, while secondary outcomes included colonic ischemia and overall survival. Analysis was performed using Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: Of 840 patients who underwent elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) reconstructions during this period, 70 underwent IMAR. Indications for IMAR included intraoperative colonic ischemia (n = 24), poor back bleeding (n = 52), large IMA (n = 5), internal iliac disease (n = 5), and prior colon surgery (n = 1). Follow-up imaging studies were available in 35 of 70 patients (computed tomography in 30 [86%] and duplex in 5 [14%]). Patency was confirmed in 32 of 35 patients (91%) over a median follow-up of 98 months. Both losses in patency were at 4 months and did not require an operation. One patient underwent left colon resection on postoperative day 9 because of ischemia. (Patency could not be confirmed.) No statistically significant predictor of patency was noted. Incidence of colonic ischemia was 1.4% in patients undergoing IMAR. The overall mortality was 51% in patients undergoing IMAR over the median follow-up period. The overall 10-year survival was 30% in patients undergoing IMAR for aortic aneurysmal disease. The nature of aneurysm (juxtarenal or higher juxta renal abdominal aortic aneurysm [JRAAA]) was associated with mortality, with a hazard ratio of 1.8 (P = 0.08) approaching significance. Ten-year survival was worse if IMAR was performed for intraoperative colonic ischemia (26% vs 34%) or in JRAAA (19.0% vs 38%; P = 0.03). Age per year at the time of repair was the only statistically significant predictor of survival (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: IMAR for AAA remains necessary for select patients. Reimplantation is associated with excellent long-term patency and low risk of colonic ischemia.

Long-term outcomes comparing endovascular and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians.

OBJECTIVE: Patients older than 80 years have significantly lower early mortality with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), but long-term results remain poorly studied. We analyzed the results of both emergent and elective AAA repair in patients aged 80 years or older who had at least 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected vascular surgery database was performed to identify all patients who underwent elective repair of an AAA between 2007 and 2012 and were 80 years of age or older at the time of surgery. Open and EVAR groups were compared using univariate statistics. RESULTS: The study cohort was composed of 314 patients 80 years of age or older (median, 83 years; interquartile range, 5 years) who underwent repair (96 open, 218 EVAR). The groups had similar comorbidities, except that EVAR patients were more likely to be male and open repair patients were more likely to have larger aneurysms. Compared with open repair, elective early postoperative mortality was significantly lower for EVAR patients (1% vs 14%; P < .001). Overall mean life expectancy was 5.9 years (EVAR, 5.8 years; open repair, 5.8 years; P = .98). The 1-year survival was significantly higher for EVAR (92.9%) than for open repair (84.1%; P = .02). The 2-year survival (EVAR, 83.4%; open repair, 74.6%; P = .07) and 5-year survival (EVAR, 57.8%; open repair, 60.3%; P = .98) did not differ between EVAR and open repair. Reintervention rates (EVAR, 18%; open repair, 2%; P = .05) were higher in the endovascular treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR results in an improved 1-year mortality in octogenarians compared with open repair, although 5-year survival is similar between the groups. With average life expectancies of >5 years and an 18% reintervention rate, diligent follow-up is required after EVAR even in elderly patients.

Vascular surgery resident training in Canada.

The training of vascular surgeons in Canada has evolved over the past decade. Direct entry into a vascular surgery training program after medical school has been offered since 2012. At some institutions, it is the only option for surgery training. The smaller population of Canada and a single-payer health care system has resulted in unique opportunities and challenges for the training of vascular surgeons and providing opportunities for trainees to transition into clinical practice.

Hybrid Arch Frozen Elephant Trunk Repair of Complex Arch Aneurysm With Severe Arterial Tortuosity.

Patients with complex aortic arch aneurysms and severe arterial tortuosity represent a unique challenge because of extreme angulations, mixed aneurysm and stenotic disease, and fragile tissues. Novel hybrid arch frozen elephant trunk techniques can expand surgical repair options to include single-stage, complete aortic reconstruction via sternotomy alone, without the need for simultaneous thoracotomy or clamshell incisions. We describe successful hybrid aortic arch reconstruction with Thoraflex Hybrid graft in a patient with complex arch aneurysm and severe arterial tortuosity.

Editor's Choice - Infrainguinal Bypass Following Failed Endovascular Intervention Compared With Primary Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with infrainguinal peripheral arterial disease often undergo multiple revascularisation procedures. Although many centres have adopted an endovascular first approach, some are reluctant to do so for fear of compromising the outcomes of any subsequent bypasses. All studies that compared the outcomes of primary infrainguinal bypass with bypass after failed endovascular intervention were analysed. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases for studies comparing outcomes of primary infrainguinal bypass with bypass after failed endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease. Abstracts and full text studies were screened independently by two reviewers with data abstraction done in duplicate. Dichotomous outcome measures were reported using the OR and 95% CI, and pooled using random effects models. RESULTS: Abstracts were screened (2,528), with 50 selected for full text review. Of these, 15 studies involving 11,886 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pooling the results of studies comparing primary bypass with bypass after failed endovascular intervention showed no significant difference in 30 day mortality (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.65-1.54), or 30 day amputation rates (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.95-1.65). Interestingly, one year amputation free survival was higher in the patients who had primary bypass (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.10-1.52) compared with patients who had bypass after failed endovascular therapy. There was also worse one year primary patency (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.04-2.62) for patients with prior failed endovascular intervention. The review demonstrated a trend towards higher rates of early graft occlusion (OR 4.54; 95% CI 0.97-21.28). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of the existing literature comparing primary bypass with bypass following failed endovascular intervention shows worse one year amputation free survival and worse primary patency in those patients who undergo bypass after failed endovascular intervention. There is also a trend towards higher rates of early graft occlusion, although these results were not statistically significant. These conclusions are limited by observational study design, inconsistent patient selection, and significant heterogeneity between studies.

Patient satisfaction with the consent discussion is not improved by showing patients their computed tomography or angiography images before they undergo vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-based decision aids and other multimedia tools have been developed to help enrich the preoperative discussion between surgeon and patient. Use of these tools, however, can be time-consuming and logistically challenging. We investigated whether simply showing patients their images from preoperative computed tomography (CT) or angiography would improve patients' satisfaction with the preoperative discussion. We also examined whether this improved the patient's understanding and trust and whether it contributed to increased preoperative anxiety. METHODS: Patients undergoing either elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair or lower limb revascularization were randomly assigned to either standard perioperative discussion or perioperative discussion and review of images (CT image or angiogram). Randomization was concealed and stratified by surgeon. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction with the preoperative discussion as measured by a validated 7-item scale (score, 0-28), with higher scores indicating improved satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included patient understanding, patient anxiety, patient trust, and length of preoperative discussion. Scores were compared using t-test. RESULTS: Overall, 51 patients were randomized, 25 to the intervention arm (discussion and imaging) and 26 to the control arm. Most patients were male (69%), and the average age was 70 years. Forty percent of patients underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, whereas 60% underwent lower limb revascularization. Patient satisfaction with the discussion was generally high, with no added improvement when preoperative images were reviewed (mean score, 24.9 ± 3.02 vs 24.8 ± 2.93; P = .88). Similarly, there was no difference in the patient's anxiety, level of trust, or understanding when the imaging review was compared with standard discussion. There was a trend toward longer preoperative discussions in the group that underwent imaging review (8.18 vs 6.35 minutes; P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: Showing patients their CT or angiography images during the preoperative discussion does not improve the patient's satisfaction with the consent discussion. Similarly, there was no effect on the patient's trust, understanding, or anxiety level. Our conclusions are limited by the lack of a standardized measure of patient understanding and not measuring outcomes postoperatively, both of which should be considered in future studies.

Outcomes of Transaxillary Approach to Cervical and First-Rib Resection for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Cervical rib can often be symptomatic causing neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (nTOS). Surgical treatment involves rib resection through a supraclavicular, transaxillary or combined approach. We review outcomes of different approaches and describe our technique of transaxillary resection through a video. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review of perioperative and short-term outcomes in subjects undergoing cervical rib resection for nTOS between 1994 and 2013 was performed. RESULTS: Of the 75 operations performed for nTOS, 40% (30 procedures in 29 patients) required resection of cervical ribs. The first and cervical ribs were removed in 24 operations, whereas only the cervical rib was resected in 6. Scalenectomy was performed in all patients. Thirteen (43%) procedures were performed with a supraclavicular-only (SC group) approach, 9 (30%) with a transaxillary-only (TA group) approach, and 8 (27%) with a combined approach (TA + SC group). Incidence of persistent nTOS symptoms occurred in 3 (23%) of SC patients, 1 (13%) TA patient, and 2 (25%) TA + SC patients (P > 0.05). Recurrence of symptoms was noted in one patient (8%) in the SC group at 1-year follow-up. No patient required operative reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of cervical ribs and/or first ribs in the treatment of nTOS can be safely performed through SC, TA, or a combined approach. In young patients, a TA incision should be considered to avoid a neck incision, with outcomes similar to alternate approaches.

Preoperative point-of-care ultrasound and its impact on arteriovenous fistula maturation outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Duplex ultrasound as a preoperative assessment tool in the clinic may help identify anatomic factors predictive of fistula maturation. Preoperative point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) offers surgeons an alternative to routine formal vein mapping as it can be performed by the operator during the initial clinic visit. We sought to determine the impact of POCUS as an adjunct to physical examination on arteriovenous fistula maturation. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing first-time dialysis access creation from December 2007 to December 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Surgeons who routinely use POCUS to assess preoperative maximal vein diameter and quality were compared with surgeons who relied only on physical examination. All access and patency definitions were in accordance with the Society for Vascular Surgery's reporting standards. The effects of POCUS on fistula maturation rate and fistula abandonment were analyzed using logistic regression, controlling for comorbidities of the patient, anticoagulant use, and location of fistula. RESULTS: A total of 316 patients were included in the study; 250 patients were assessed exclusively with physical examination, and 66 patients underwent preoperative ultrasound examination by the vascular surgeon in the clinic. The primary failure rate in the ultrasound group was 18% compared with 47% (P < .001) in the group of patients who did not undergo ultrasound examination. In patients without preoperative ultrasound, there were higher rates of new access creation (31% vs 9%; P < .001) and fistula abandonment (66% vs 39%; P < .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that fistulas created without preoperative ultrasound were associated with a 3.56 greater risk of failure (95% confidence interval, 1.67-7.59; P = .001) compared with fistulas in the POCUS group. Similarly, the rate of fistula abandonment was 2.63 times higher (95% confidence interval, 1.38-5.05; P = .003) when ultrasound was not used preoperatively. Time to functional fistula maturation was better in the ultrasound group (P < .001). At 1 year, 12% of fistulas in the ultrasound group and 32% in the clinical examination group had yet to be cannulated. Secondary patency at 1 year was better in the POCUS group at 73% compared with 59% in the group with no preoperative ultrasound (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: POCUS as an adjunct to physical examination for dialysis access patients leads to decreased rates of primary failure, new access creation, and fistula abandonment compared with patients who undergo only physical examination. Ultrasound examination improved times to functional fistula maturation and secondary patency. Further studies are required to compare POCUS with formal preoperative vein mapping for arteriovenous fistula planning.