Distal Arteriovenous Fistulas in Elderly Hemodialysis Patients

Should a fistula first policy be revisited in elderly haemodialysis patients?

Life-sustaining haemodialysis requires a durable vascular access (VA) to the circulatory system. The ideal permanent VA must provide longevity for use with minimal complication rate and supply sufficient blood flow to deliver the prescribed dialysis dosage. Arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) have been endorsed by many professional societies as the VA of choice. However, the high prevalence of comorbidities, particularly diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and arterial hypertension in elderly people, usually make VA creation more difficult in the elderly. Many of these patients may have an insufficient vasculature for AVF maturation. Furthermore, many AVFs created prior to the initiation of haemodialysis may never be used due to the competing risk of death before dialysis is required. As such, an arteriovenous graft and, in some cases, a central venous catheter, become a valid alternative form of VA. Consequently, there are multiple decision points that require careful reflection before an AVF is placed in the elderly. The traditional metrics of access patency, failure and infection are now being seen in a broader context that includes procedure burden, quality of life, patient preferences, morbidity, mortality and cost. This article of the European Dialysis (EUDIAL) Working Group of ERA-EDTA critically reviews the current evidence on VA in elderly haemodialysis patients and concludes that a pragmatic patient-centred approach is mandatory, thus considering the possibility that the AVF first approach should not be an absolute.

The vascular access in the elderly: a position statement of the Vascular Access Working Group of the Italian Society of Nephrology

The incident hemodialysis (HD) population is aging, and the elderly group is the one with the most rapid increase. In this context it is important to define the factors associated with outcomes in elderly patients. The high prevalence of comorbidities, particularly diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and congestive heart failure, usually make vascular access (VA) creation more difficult. Furthermore, many of these patients may have an insufficient vasculature for fistula maturation. Finally, many fistulas may never be used due to the competing risk of death before dialysis initiation. In these cases, an arteriovenous graft and in some cases a central venous catheter become a valid alternative form of VA. Nephrologists need to know what is the most appropriate VA option in these patients. Age should not be a limiting factor when determining candidacy for arteriovenous fistula creation. The aim of this position statement, prepared by experts of the Vascular Access Working Group of the Italian Society of Nephrology, is to critically review the current evidence on VA in elderly HD patients. To this end, relevant clinical studies and recent guidelines on VA are reviewed and commented. The main advantages and potential drawbacks of the different VA modalities in the elderly patients are discussed.

Survival and Complications of Arteriovenous Fistula Dialysis Access in an Elderly Population

Purpose

In recent years, the number of elderly uremic patients who commence renal replacement therapy has increased. A retrospective review assessed the survival rate and incidence of complications in elderly patients with an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) created between January 2000 and August 2008.

Methods

A total of 78 patients, 48 men and 30 women aged ≥75 with a mean age of 82.5±7.5, commenced hemodialysis therapy during the period under consideration; 31% were diabetic and all had a LVEF ≥30%. For this group of patients, 90 AVF were created: 41 distal AVF (45%), 32 proximal AVF (35%), 13 midarm AVF (15%), and four AV grafts (5%).

Results

The survival rate of the AVF was 76% at 12 months and 71% at 24 months. A total of 47 patients with functioning AVF (60%) died during the study period. There were 18 cases of thrombosis (20%). No significant local or systemic complications occurred.

Conclusions

Several aspects should be highlighted: pre-operative color-flow duplex scanning, timing of the creation of the AVF and placement of the AVF as distal as possible. The creation of AVF in elderly patients is a choice supported by the opinion that patients with tunneled central venous catheters have higher mortality rates than those with AVF. In summary, choosing vascular access sites to be created in elderly patients is no different than for younger patients–an AVF remains the gold standard.

Comparative outcomes of primary autogenous fistulas in elderly, multiethnic Asian hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

The number of elderly (≥65 years) end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on hemodialysis is rapidly increasing. Vascular access outcomes remain contradictory and understudied across different elderly populations. We hypothesized age might influence primary autogenous fistula use and outcomes in a predominantly diabetic multiethnic Asian ESRD population.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical factors affecting fistula patency and maturation were retrospectively compared among patients with incident ESRD aged <65 and ≥65 years at a single center. Fistula patency was estimated by Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test comparison.

RESULTS

We analyzed 280 primary fistulas (59% radiocephalic, 33% brachiocephalic, and 8% brachiobasilic) in this cohort consisting of 31.8% aged ≥65 years, 50% Chinese, 39% Malay, 42% women, and 70% diabetic. One- and 2-year primary and secondary patency in patients aged <65 vs ≥65 years were comparable: 41.3% vs 36.7% and 28.7% vs 24.4% (P = .547) and 57.7% vs 56.8% and 47.1% vs 47.2% (P = .990). On multivariate analysis, only non-Chinese, dialysis initiation with tunneled catheters, and surgical/endovascular interventions affected fistula survival hazard ratios (HR): 0.622 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-1.00), 0.549 (95% CI, 0.297-0.841), and 2.503 (95% CI, 1.695-3.697), respectively. Nonmaturation and intervention rates were also similar at 56.7% vs 61.8% and 34% vs 32.2% at 3 and 6 months and 0.31 vs 0.36 per access year, respectively (P > .05). Females and tunneled catheters were the only risk factors for nonmaturation (HR, 1.568; 95% CI, 1.148-1.608, and HR, 1.623; 95% CI, 1.400-1.881, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

A primary fistula strategy in incident elderly ESRD is feasible and does not result in inferior outcomes. Age should therefore not be a determinant for primary fistula creation.

The Middle Arm Arteriovenous Fistula is an Additional Option to Expand Autogenous Hemodialysis Access

Purpose

the native artero-venous fistula is the gold standard for hemodialysis access. Unfortunately, the wrist fistula is often not practical and the upper arm fistula is hindered by several complications. The aim of this study is to assess the safety of the middle-arm fistula as additional native access.

Methods

we reviewed and compared the patency rates at 12, 48, and 60 months of distal, middle, and upper arm fistula performed from January 2003 to December 2008. For diabetic and old patients we compared distal and middle-arm fistulas.

Results

of 273 native access, 149 (54.6%) were distal, 92 (33.7%) middle-arm, and 32 (11.7%) upper fistula. Patency rates were 81%, 58%, and 52% for distal, 85%, 69%, and 69% for middle-arm, and 82%, 46%, and 29% for upper arm fistula (P NS). Patency rates were 92%, 70%, and 54% in middle-arm fistula as first access and 80%, 71%, and 71% in middle-arm fistula as a rescue access (P NS). Among patients > 75 years patency rates were 78%, 62%, and 62% for distal and 87%, 67%, and 67% for middle-arm fistula. Among diabetic subjects patency rates were 81%, 58%, and 58% for middle-arm and 65%, 57%, and 57% for distal fistula at 12, 48, and 60 months (P NS) respectively.

Conclusions

A middle-arm fistula is as safe as a distal fistula among dialyzed patients, even diabetic and elderly. This could be considered a reliable option to expand native accesses.

Vascular access for hemodialysis in the elderly

OBJECTIVE

The number of elderly patients needing hemodialysis is constantly increasing year by year. Elderly patients with end-stage renal failure represent a challenge for the surgeons who create vascular accesses. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of conduit creation in the elderly in our institution and to compare it with the outcome of a cohort of patients aged <65 years.

METHODS

The study was performed retrospectively on prospectively collected data. The study period was between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2006. We identified first attempts at conduit creations, including arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and grafts, in elderly patients (aged ≥65 years) who were allocated to group A, and in nonelderly patients (<65 years) who were allocated to group B. Subsequent attempts at conduit creations in the same patient were omitted from the data set.

RESULTS

There were 246 first AVFs in group A and 89 in group B. At a mean follow-up of 25.46 months (SD, 18.93 months), the primary patency (PP) rate of all AVFs was 70% in group A and 68% in group B (P = .75). The assisted PP rate was 73% in group A and 77% in group B (P = .4). The secondary patency (SP) rate was 73% in group A and 79% in group B (P = .9). Also, the differences in the 12-month cumulative patency rates (including PP, assisted PP, and SP) in the two groups (65% vs 60%) were not significant. At a mean follow-up of 25 months, death with a functioning conduit occurred at the same rate in both groups (56% and 54%), and mean conduit survival did not differ according to age (516 and 511 days). The incidence of failure to mature was higher in group A (6.1% vs 1.1%, P = .03). Patency rates for different types of conduits were similar between the two groups, although polytetrafluoroethylene grafts had a higher cumulative patency in group A (94% vs 69%; P = .05). The rate of procedures to salvage conduits was 2.5% in group A vs 10.1% in group B. Mean hospital stay for group A and group B was 3.2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, the creation of permanent hemodialysis access in the elderly with AVF is not only possible but also proved to have a short hospital stay, high patency rates, and an acceptable rate of further intervention.

A meta-analysis of dialysis access outcome in elderly patients

BACKGROUND

Many authors report inferior patency rates of distal arteriovenous fistulas in elderly patients and others present contradictory results. A meta-analysis of available evidence was performed to assess (1) whether non-elderly adults have the same risk of forearm arteriovenous fistula failure as elderly patients with end-stage renal disease and (2) whether such a distal access has the same risk of failure as more proximal access procedures or grafts in elderly patients.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the MEDLINE and SCOPUS electronic databases. The analysis involved studies that comprised subgroups of elderly patients and compared their outcomes with those of non-elderly adults. Articles comparing patency rates of radial-cephalic and proximal fistulas or grafts in elderly patients were also included. Thirteen relevant studies (all cohort observational studies, 11 retrospective) were identified and included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significantly higher rate of radial-cephalic arteriovenous fistula failure in elderly patients compared with non-elderly adults at 12 (odds ratio [OR], 1.525; P = .001) and 24 months (OR, 1.357, P = .019). The primary radial-cephalic arteriovenous fistula failure rate was also in favor of the non-elderly adults (OR, 1.79; P = .012). Secondary analysis revealed a pooled effect in favor of the elbow brachiocephalic fistulas that was statistically significant (P = .004) compared with distal fistulas in elderly patients.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis found an increased risk of radial-cephalic fistula failure in elderly patients and significant benefit from the creation of proximal autologous brachiocephalic fistulas. If confirmed by further prospective studies, these differences should be considered when planning a vascular access in incident elderly patients.