Lessons learnt and future directions in managing dialysis access during the COVID 19 pandemic: Patient and provider experience in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The COVID 19 pandemic adversely impacted delivery of preventive, routine, urgent, and essential care worldwide. Dialysis access care was particularly affected due to the lack of specific guidelines regarding procedures for its creation and maintenance. Early guidance by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid was inadvertently interpreted as guidance to stop dialysis access procedures. Prompt action by professional societies was needed to furnish detailed guidance to establish essential nature of these procedures. METHODS: The American Society of Diagnostic and Interventional Nephrology (ASDIN) issued a joint statement with Vascular Access Society of the Americas (VASA) - "Maintaining Lifelines for ESKD Patients" to clearly establish the role of vascular access as a lifeline for ESKD (End Stage Kidney Disease) patients and the importance and urgency of its timely management. ASDIN also conducted a survey in mid-2020, that was administered to the ASDIN database as well as shared with the general public via the organization's social media platforms. The respondents reported their experiences in the care of dialysis access, practice patterns and the utility of the ASDIN-VASA statement during the COVID 19 pandemic. RESULTS: Of the 2030 individual surveys sent, 581 were opened and 53 (9.1%) responses were received from different parts of the country and from different practice settings. ASDIN COVID 19 triage document was frequently utilized and 83% of respondents found the document valuable. The survey also revealed multiple obstacles, including logistical and financial issues that led to significant disruption of services. CONCLUSIONS: The care of dialysis access was significantly affected in the United States during the COVID 19 pandemic due to multiple reasons. ASDIN actions provided valuable specific guidance regarding and explored barriers to dialysis access care. We describe those results and discuss strategies to prevent COVID 19 transmission with innovative strategies of providing access care. Individualized decision making is of essence when considering dialysis access procedures.

Patient-reported outcomes in hemodialysis vascular access: A call to action.

While access-related dysfunction is a clear driver of clinical outcomes and costs, the full impact of vascular access dysfunction on patient experience and quality of life is not fully characterized in the literature. One way to more comprehensively characterize the patient experience from the patient perspective is through patient reported outcomes (PROs). However, the limited implementation of PROs in clinical trials, patient registries, quality measurement, and other research settings has significantly constrained the patient voice in evaluation of vascular access outcomes and vascular access decision-making. To address these issues, the Kidney Health Initiative, a public-private partnership between the American Society of Nephrology and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, assembled an interdisciplinary workgroup to enhance uptake of access-related PROs with the aims of: (1) reviewing the domains of HRQOL that are affected by vascular access, collect information on existing instruments that measure access-specific HRQOL in hemodialysis, and identify gaps in existing measures; (2) identifying and critically assessing barriers to widespread use of access-specific PRO measures; and (3) defining initiatives to overcome barriers and make recommendations for strategies to improve the use and utility of access-specific PRO measures. A consensus group process identified potential barriers to use of PRO measures in six categories: (1) PRO misperceptions, (2) patient factors, (3) regulators and payers, (4) instrument factors, (5) study design, and (6) physicians. The workgroup provided recommendations for actions to promote the widespread utilization of vascular access-related PRO measures in five categories: (1) development of vascular access-specific PRO measures, (2) ensuring comprehensive assessment when using vascular access PRO measures, (3) ensuring accessibility and applicability of vascular access PRO measures to all end stage kidney disease populations, (4) establishing universal guidelines and accepted vascular access PRO measures, and (5) engaging stakeholders across all facets.

Comparison of Ellipsys Percutaneous and Proximal Forearm Gracz-Type Surgical Arteriovenous Fistulas.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) are created by establishing a proximal forearm anastomosis and offer a safe and reliable vascular access. This study compares the Ellipsys percutaneous AVF with a proximal forearm Gracz-type surgical AVF, chosen for comparison as it is constructed at the same anatomical site. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of prospectively collected clinical data. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All vascular access procedures conducted during a 34-month period were reviewed. The study groups comprised 89 percutaneous AVFs and 69 surgical AVFs. EXPOSURE: Percutaneous or surgical AVF placement. OUTCOME: AVF patency, function, and complications. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Patency rates for each AVF group were evaluated by competing risk survival analysis using a cumulative incidence function. Association of primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency with the AVF groups was examined by Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Technical success was 100% for both groups. Average procedure times were 14 minutes for percutaneous AVFs and 74 minutes for surgical AVFs (P < 0.001). Proximal radial artery (PRA) was used in all percutaneous AVF cases. Inflow for surgical AVFs included radial (30%), ulnar (12%), and brachial (58%) arteries. Outflow veins for both groups were the cephalic and/or basilic veins. Access flow volumes, times to maturation, and overall numbers of interventions per patient-year were not significantly different. Cumulative incidence of primary patency failure at 12 months was lower for surgical AVF (47% vs 64%, P = 0.1), but secondary patency failure was not different between groups (20% vs 12%, P = 0.3). PRA surgical AVFs had similar primary patency (65% vs 64%, P = 0.8) but higher secondary patency failure rates than percutaneous AVFs at 12 months (34% vs 12%, P = 0.04). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study with a relatively short follow-up period, and not all patients required hemodialysis at the end of study. CONCLUSIONS: Both percutaneous and surgical AVFs demonstrated high rates of technical success and secondary patency. Percutaneous AVFs required shorter procedure times. The rate of intervention was similar. When a distal radial artery AVF is not feasible, percutaneous AVF might offer an appropriate procedure for creating a safe and functional access, maintaining further proximal forearm surgical AVF creation options.

Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistulae Creation by Ellipsys and WavelinQ Devices.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of Ellipsys with those of WavelinQ-4F percutaneous arteriovenous fistulae (pAVF) devices in a single center by a single operator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted in 100 patients who underwent pAVFs procedures (65 Ellipsys and 35 WavelinQ patients) and created between December 2017 and December 2019. A total of 69% were male and 37% were diabetic. Median age was 64.1 years (range: 28-86), and median body mass index was 27.2 (range: 15-45.1) kg/m2. A procedure sequence algorithm was followed for selecting all vascular accesses created. RESULTS: Ellipsys outcomes were compared to WavelinQ outcomes. Technical success was 100% versus 97%, respectively, and median procedure times were 14 versus 63 minutes, respectively (P < .001), with 183 (1-487) versus 185 (0-760) days follow-up, respectively. Maturation at 4 weeks was 68.3% versus 54.3%, respectively, and median times to cannulation were 60 (1-164) versus 90 (1-180) days, respectively. Successful pAVF dialysis was established in 31 of 39 patients (79.5%) versus 14 of 24 patients (58%), respectively (P = .071), dialysis patients with access-related adverse events observed in 4 individuals (1 Ellipsys versus 3 WavelinQ). Six patients (5 versus 1) with matured outflow from previous AVFs underwent first-day cannulations. Interventions were performed in 27.7% (33 Ellipsys) and 26.5% (15 WavelinQ) patients, and the number of interventions per patient-years was 0.96 versus 0.46, respectively. pAVF failure was seen in 15.4% versus 37.1% patients, respectively (P = .0137). Secondary patency at 12 months was significantly higher among patients who had an Ellipsys procedure (82%) than among those who underwent the WavelinQ procedure (60%). CONCLUSIONS: pAVFs were created with high technical success and low complications with both devices. Ellipsys pAVFs demonstrated significantly shorter procedure times without a need for radiation exposure and with superior secondary patency.

Two-year cumulative patency of endovascular arteriovenous fistula.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The recent advent of a device to create a proximal radial artery arteriovenous fistula using an endovascular approach to create the anastomosis represents a significant advance in dialysis access creation. This endovascular arteriovenous fistula offers the beneficial attributes of the proximal radial artery arteriovenous fistula while adding the advantages of avoiding a surgical procedure. The endovascular arteriovenous fistula can be created safely, functions well, has excellent patency, and has a high degree of patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study is to report the 2-year cumulative patency rate for a large multicenter cohort of endovascular arteriovenous fistula cases. DESIGN: An endovascular arteriovenous fistula was created in 105 patients using either local or regional anesthesia and conscious sedation. Patient data were obtained from each program's electronic health record system. Data collection was truncated at 2 years postprocedure and used to calculate cumulative patency. Post-access creation patient satisfaction was assessed. RESULTS: A physiologically mature arteriovenous fistula (blood flow ⩾500 mL/min and a target vein internal diameter ⩾4 mm) was obtained in 98%. A clinically functional arteriovenous fistula (supporting two-needle dialysis according to the patient's dialysis prescription) was demonstrated in 95%. Access failure resulting in the loss of access occurred in eight cases during the study period. The cumulative patency rate at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was 97.1%, 93.9%, 93.9%, and 92.7%, respectively. The post-procedure patient evaluation emphasized a high level of patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: The proximal radial artery arteriovenous fistula created using an endovascular approach for the anastomosis is associated with excellent 2-year cumulative patency and is associated with a high level of patient satisfaction.

Patient selection, education, and cannulation of percutaneous arteriovenous fistulae: An ASDIN White Paper.

End-stage kidney disease patients who are candidates for surgical arteriovenous fistula creation commonly experience obstacles to a functional surgical arteriovenous fistula, including protracted wait time for creation, poor maturation, and surgical arteriovenous fistula dysfunction that can result in significant patient morbidity. The recent approval of two endovascular devices designed to create a percutaneous arteriovenous fistula enables arteriovenous fistula creation to be placed in the hands of interventionalists, thereby increasing the number of arteriovenous fistula providers, reducing wait times, and allowing the patient to avoid surgery. Moreover, current studies demonstrate that patients with percutaneous arteriovenous fistula experience improved time to arteriovenous fistula maturation. Yet, in order to realize the potential advantages of percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation within our hemodialysis patient population, it is critical to select appropriate patients, ensure adequate patient and dialysis unit education, and provide sufficient instruction in percutaneous arteriovenous fistula cannulation and monitoring. In this White Paper by the American Society of Diagnostic and Interventional Nephrology, experts in interventional nephrology, surgery, and interventional radiology convened and provide recommendations on the aforementioned elements that are fundamental to a functional percutaneous arteriovenous fistula.

What is the best setting for receiving dialysis vascular access repair and maintenance services?

INTRODUCTION: Advances in dialysis vascular access (DVA) management have changed where beneficiaries receive this care. The effectiveness, safety, quality, and economy of different care settings have been questioned. This study compares patient outcomes of receiving DVA services in the freestanding office-based center (FOC) to those of the hospital outpatient department (HOPD). It also examines whether outcomes differ for a centrally managed system of FOCs (CMFOC) compared to all other FOCs (AOFOC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of clinically and demographically similar patients within Medicare claims available through United States Renal Data System (USRDS) (2010-2013) who received at least 80% of DVA services in an FOC (n = 80,831) or HOPD (n = 133,965). Separately, FOC population is divided into CMFOC (n = 20,802) and AOFOC (n = 80,267). Propensity matching was used to control for clinical, demographic, and functional characteristics across populations. RESULTS: FOC patients experienced significantly better outcomes, including lower annual mortality (14.6% vs. 17.2%, p<0.001) and DVA-related infections (0.16 vs. 0.20, p<0.001), fewer hospitalizations (1.65 vs. 1.91, p<0.001), and lower total per-member-per-month (PMPM) payments ($5042 vs. $5361, p<0.001) than HOPD patients. CMFOC patients had lower annual mortality (12.5% vs. 13.8%, p<0.001), PMPM payments (DVA services) ($1486 vs. $1533, p<0.001) and hospitalizations ($1752 vs. $1816, p<0.001) than AOFOC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Where nephrologists send patients for DVA services can impact patient clinical and economic outcomes. This research confirmed that patients who received DVA care in the FOC had better outcomes than those treated in the HOPD. The organizational culture and clinical oversight of the CMFOC may result in more favorable outcomes than receiving care in AOFOC.

Changes in the Profile of Endovascular Procedures Performed in Freestanding Dialysis Access Centers over 15 Years.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Marked changes occurred in the vascular access profile of patients receiving hemodialysis in the United States over the 15-year period of 2001-2015. This study was undertaken to evaluate how these changes have affected dialysis access maintenance and salvage procedures performed in freestanding dialysis access centers and to examine the effectiveness, efficiency, and safety of these procedures in this setting. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data were collected from freestanding, dedicated dialysis access centers operating under a common system of management. Data were available on 689,676 dialysis access procedures. Data relating to case mix, procedure outcome, procedural time, and intraprocedural and immediate postprocedural complications were analyzed. RESULTS: The arteriovenous procedure profile changed from one characterized by approximately equal numbers of angioplasties and thrombectomies performed on arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) to one characterized primarily by angioplasties performed on arteriovenous fistulas. The percentage of angioplasties performed throughout the study was significantly greater than thrombectomies, with a mean of 67.9% versus 32.1% (P<0.001). Interventional procedures did not decrease with increasing arteriovenous fistula utilization in prevalent patients receiving dialysis. The incidence roughly paralleled the increasing prevalence of this type of access. A decreasing percentage of AVG utilization resulted in a progressive, roughly parallel, but disproportionately higher, decrease in the percentage of AVG procedures (P<0.001). A progressive improvement in procedure outcomes and a decrease in complication rates and procedure times were observed (P<0.001 for each). A progressive decrease in tunneled dialysis catheter placement was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: The procedure profile treated in freestanding, dedicated dialysis access centers changed significantly over 15 years, reflecting the changes that have occurred in the vascular access profile of the dialysis population.

The risk of bleeding with tunneled dialysis catheter placement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of bleeding associated with tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) placement in a large population of hemodialysis patients who were either anticoagulated or were taking antithrombotic medications. METHODS: Medical records obtained over a two-year period were queried in order to select two groups of study cases. The first was a Med group (n = 458), cases which had a TDC placed while taking the antithrombotic medications (warfarin, clopidogrel or acetylsalicylic acid [ASA]) which were not discontinued or held. The second was a Declot Failure (DF) group (n = 941) and consisted of cases in which a TDC had been placed immediately following a failed arteriovenous access thrombectomy procedure in which they had been anticoagulated using unfractionated heparin. The results obtained in these two groups were compared to the incidence of bleeding observed in a cohort of 6555 TDC placements that had been performed previously referred to as the Control group. RESULTS: The incidence of bleeding in the Control group was 0.46%. The incidence of bleeding in the DF group was 0.44% and in the Med group was 0.36%. No patient had bleeding that required transfusion, hospitalization, or catheter removal. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon these data, it seems reasonable to classify the TDC placement procedure as having a very low risk of bleeding and to not require preprocedure laboratory testing. The value of suspending antithrombotic medications prior to TDC placement cannot be supported.

Surgical site infection rates in dialysis patients undergoing endovascular procedures.

A surgical site infection (SSI) is an infection related to surgery that develops within 30 days after an operation or within 1 year of implant placement. Postoperative SSIs are the most common health-care-associated infections, occurring in up to 5% of surgical patients. Endovascular surgical procedures related to vascular access are common in the dialysis population and may cause SSIs. A large outpatient vascular access system developed and implemented a surveillance program to measure and monitor SSIs in their population. The health-care surveillance system extended to 76 ambulatory care centers across the United States and Puerto Rico. Based on a recorded 92,880 patient encounters, the surveillance system tabulated 12,541 valid patient survey responses documenting self-reported symptoms of infection within a 30-day postoperative period. The SSI rate was tabulated based on the presence of two or more specified indicators of infection: antibiotics, pus, dehiscence, pain, warmth, and swelling. Patients undergoing interventional procedures received surveys at discharge. Data were collected and analyzed using SPSS software. Survey analysis indicated a less than 3% superficial incisional SSI rate in hemodialysis patients undergoing endovascular procedures. The SSI rate for clean wound procedures is generally 2% or less. These data indicate that dialysis patients undergoing interventional procedures in vascular access centers may have a slightly greater risk of developing SSIs due to the presence of additional risk factors including obesity, diabetes, and age. This study was limited by a set of loose diagnostic criteria self-reported by patients, which may have overestimated the prevalence of infection. SSIs are a serious medical problem associated with increased morbidity and mortality and increased medical care costs. All providers should consider an active surveillance program following endovascular procedures given the comorbidities associated with the dialysis population.

Clinical and economic value of performing dialysis vascular access procedures in a freestanding office-based center as compared with the hospital outpatient department among Medicare ESRD beneficiaries.

Dialysis vascular access (DVA) care is being increasingly provided in freestanding office-based centers (FOC). Small-scale studies have suggested that DVA care in a FOC results in favorable patient outcomes and lower costs. To further evaluate this issue, data were drawn from incident and prevalent ESRD patients within a 4-year sample (2006-2009) of Medicare claims (USRDS) on cases who receive at least 80% of their DVA care in a FOC or a hospital outpatient department (HOPD). Using propensity score matching techniques, cases with a similar clinical and demographic profile from these two sites of service were matched. Medicare utilization, payments, and patient outcomes were compared across the matched cohorts (n = 27,613). Patients treated in the FOC had significantly better outcomes (p < 0.001), including fewer related or unrelated hospitalizations (3.8 vs. 4.4), vascular access-related infections (0.18 vs. 0.29), and septicemia-related hospitalizations (0.15 vs. 0.18). Mortality rate was lower (47.9% vs. 53.5%) as were PMPM payments ($4,982 vs. $5,566). This study shows that DVA management provided in a FOC has multiple advantages over that provided in a HOPD.

Radiation dose associated with dialysis vascular access interventional procedures in the interventional nephrology facility.

The number of dialysis access procedures performed by interventional nephrologists using a mobile C-arm fluoroscopy machine in freestanding centers continues to rise. With this activity comes the risk of radiation exposure to patients being treated and staff. This study was conducted to assess the levels of radiation dosage involved with these procedures. Dosimetry information including kerma area product (KAP), reference point air kerma (RPAK) and fluoroscopy time (FT) was collected prospectively. Radiation dosage data were collected from 24 centers in various parts of the United States and reflected cases managed by 69 different interventional nephrologists. The data were tabulated separately for eight procedures - fistula angioplasty and thrombectomy, graft angioplasty and thrombectomy, tunneled catheter placement and exchange, vein mapping and cases in which only angiographic evaluation was performed. The range for all of the measured parameters was large. Additionally there was considerable inter-operator variability. The dosage levels noted in this series were well below the threshold for deterministic effects. FT for AVF procedures was higher than for other types of access. The highest values were observed for thrombectomies. The highest KAP values were recorded for venous mapping. Thrombectomy procedures were associated with the highest RPAK levels. All dosage metrics were considerably lower than those previously reported.

The risk of sedation/analgesia in hemodialysis patients undergoing interventional procedures.

Data derived from a large cohort of hemodialysis patients (12,896) undergoing dialysis access maintenance procedures being performed by interventional nephrologists were analyzed to determine the safety of sedation/analgesia (S/A) in a freestanding facility. Data collected included patient demographics, procedures performed, time of procedures, drugs used, doses used, and complications that occurred. Four high-risk groups were identified based upon age, pulmonary status, and over all physical status. These were compared to the total cohort. Midazolam, fentanyl, or a combination of the two were used. Within the total cohort of patients, midazolam alone was used most commonly (94.7%). The total mean dose of midazolam when used alone was 3.4 mg. The dosages used in the high-risk groups tended to be only slightly lower (3-3.2 mg). This setting appears to be safe for hemodialysis patients, even those in high-risk subgroups having these types of procedures. The types of drugs and the dosages that are commonly used do not appear to be associated with an unacceptable risk to the hemodialysis patient. A nephrologist that is not specialty trained in anesthesia is able to provide S/A safely in a freestanding facility.

The classification of procedure-related complications--a fresh approach.

As with any type of medical procedure, endovascular procedures result in procedure-related complications (PRCs). A PRC system as part of an outcome-based practice monitoring strategy is essential. Such a program should have several features. It should be realistic, it should be standardized, it should have credibility, it must allow for comparisons with other physicians who are performing the same procedure, and it should be easily accomplished. Currently the only system in popular use is the system designed by the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR). Definitions within this system are excessively broad and somewhat difficult to apply. This leads to inconsistencies. SIR indicates that their system is intended for use in publications of clinical research and may not be appropriate for use in routine clinical practice. There is a need for a system specifically aimed at and designed for day to day use by the practicing interventionalist whose work is not necessarily directed toward publication. We have described a system from the clinical applications viewpoint.

How a dedicated vascular access center can promote increased use of fistulas.

Fistula First, now a CMS "Breakthrough Initiative", sets the eventual goal of 66% prevalence of arteriovenous (AV) fistulas in the U.S. dialysis population. The benefit of an AVfistula as the hemodialysis access has been clearly demonstrated; yet the current incidence of AV fistulas in patients new to dialysis in the U.S. is extremely low and prevalence rates are approximately half the eventual target rate. In this article, the components of an Integrated Vascular Access Program are described. One of these is a dedicated Vascular Access Center (VAC), a facility specializing in radiographic and interventional procedures for the vascular access care of patients with ESRD. Procedures carried out in a dedicated VAC are described and are shown to support both K/DOQI and the Fistula First "Change Package" in terms of promoting increased prevalence of AV fistulas. These include preoperative vessel mapping, fistula maturation, fistula maintenance, and identification of candidates for secondary fistula. The above type procedures that were carried out in our dedicated VAC in 2004 are described. These included vessel mapping (n=220), fistula maturation procedures (n=104), and fistula maintenance procedures (n=103). The results suggest that the shift to a "fistula culture" within a dialysis practice requires a significant number of interventional procedures--both maturation and maintenance types. A dedicated VAC can efficiently carry out these procedures and is an important component of an Integrated Vascular Access Program.

Effectiveness and safety of dialysis vascular access procedures performed by interventional nephrologists.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report was to analyze the results obtained from a group of interventional nephrologists working in multiple centers performing basic procedures that are used routinely in the management of vascular access problems, with an effort toward establishing standards for evaluating success, complication rates, and acceptable times for procedure duration and fluoroscopy. METHODS: Data on six basic procedures were analyzed-angioplasty of arteriovenous fistulas (AVF-PTA), angioplasty of synthetic grafts (graft-PTA), thrombectomy of arteriovenous fistulas (AVF declot), thrombectomy of synthetic grafts (graft declot), placement of tunneled dialysis catheters (TDC placement), and tunneled dialysis catheter exchange (TDC exchange). These data were examined both as a group and by individual physician operator. RESULTS. A total of 14,067 cases were performed under the six categories of procedure that were the subject of this report; 13,503 cases (96.18%) were successful. The overall complication rate for the combined group of procedures was 3.54%, with 3.26% falling within the minor category and 0.28% within the major. The number of cases performed in each individual category with success rates for each were as follows: TDC placement-1765 cases, 98.24% successful; TDC exchange-2262 cases, 98.36% successful, AVF-PTA-1561 cases, 96.58% successful; graft-PTA-3560 cases, 98.06% successful; AVF declot-228 cases, 78.10% successful; graft declot-4671 cases, 93.08% successful. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that appropriately trained interventional nephrologists can perform these basic procedures in both a safe and effective manner.

Aggressive treatment of early fistula failure.

BACKGROUND: Fistula failure has been classified as early and late. Early failure refers to those cases in which the arteriovenous (AV) fistula never develops to the point that it can be used or fails within the first 3 months of usage. It has been common practice to abandon these early failures; however, aggressive evaluation and treatment of early fistula failures has been shown to result in the salvage of a large percentage. The two most common causes of the failure seen at this time are juxta-anastomotic stenosis (JAS) and the presence of accessory veins. Both of these can be easily diagnosed by physical examination. This study reports the results of early fistula failure managed aggressively in an attempt at salvage. METHODS: These studies were conducted in six freestanding outpatient interventional facilities in different regions of the United States. Interventional nephrologists are employed at all of these facilities except one that is operated by an interventional radiologist. Each patient was first evaluated angiographically to identify the anatomy of their AV fistula and detect abnormalities that might be present. Stenotic lesions were then treated with angioplasty and accessory veins thought to be significant were obliterated. All patients were then followed to determine if the fistula was usable for dialysis. RESULTS: One hundred patients were identified that met the definition of early failure. Venous stenosis was present in 78% of these cases. In 43% of the cases, the lesion was in the JAS location. In 15%, this was the only lesion present. In 24%, it was associated with an accessory vein, in 6% with a proximal stenosis, and in 4% with both. A proximal stenosis lesion was present in the fistula in 36%. In 6%, it was associated with an accessory vein, in 6% with a JAS, and in 4% with both. The definition of arterial anastomosis stenosis was met in 38% of the cases. This was always in association with JAS. In four cases, a stenotic lesion was present in the artery above the anastomosis. An accessory vein was present in 46% of the cases. In 12% of the cases, this was the only lesion present. In 24% of the cases, this anomaly was associated with JAS, in 6% with proximal stenosis, and in 4% with both. Angioplasty was performed to treat venous stenosis in 72% of the cases with a 98% success rate. Angioplasty of the arterial anastomosis was performed in 38 cases with a 100% success rate. Accessory vein obliteration was performed in 46% of the patients with a 100% success rate. The overall complication rate in this series was 4%, of these 3% were minor and 1% were major. It was possible to initiate dialysis using the fistula in 92% of the cases. Actuarial life-table analysis showed that 84% were functional at 3 months, 72% at 6 months, and 68% at 12 months. CONCLUSION: If correctable pathology is detected in patients with early fistula failure, the incidence of correctable lesions is relatively high and an aggressive therapeutic approach can be expected to have a high yield.