Clinical Outcomes of Arteriovenous Grafts Using the Superficial Vein versus Venae Comitantes as Venous Outflow

Background

The superficial veins are commonly used in conventional autogenous arteriovenous fistulas and the placement of prosthetic grafts. When they are unsuitable, however, the use of the deep veins (venae comitantes) is generally considered to be a reasonable alternative. This study conducted a comparative analysis of clinical outcomes for arteriovenous grafts between 2 groups based on the type of venous outflow: superficial veins or venae comitantes.

Methods

In total, 151 patients who underwent arteriovenous grafts from November 2005 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: group A (superficial veins, n=89) and group B (venae comitantes, n=62). The primary, secondary patency, and complication rates were analyzed in each group. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed.

Results

In total, 55 well-balanced pairs were matched. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant differences in the primary patency rate between the 2 groups at 1-year, 3-year and 5-year intervals (group A, 54.7%, 35.9%, 25.4% vs. group B, 47.9%, 16.8%, 12.6%; p=0.14), but there was a difference in the secondary patency rate (group A, 98.2%, 95.3%, 86.5% vs. group B, 87.3%, 76.8%, 67.6%; p=0.0095). The rates of complications, simple percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, and stent insertion were comparable between the groups.

Conclusion

Although this study demonstrated not particularly favorable secondary patency rates in the venae comitantes group, the venae comitantes may still be a viable option for patients with unsuitable superficial veins because there were no significant differences in the primary patency and complication rates between the 2 groups.

Forearm brachial artery to brachial vein looped arteriovenous grafts: A single center, single surgeon observational study

BACKGROUND

Long-term hemodialysis (HD) treatment requires the establishment of a cannulatable vascular access (VA) point. While the arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is considered the gold standard, the arteriovenous graft (AVG) is a viable alternative especially in patients with poor superficial venous anatomy. Few studies have assessed the efficacy of the brachial-brachial arteriovenous graft (BB-AVG) for long-term HD access. By analyzing one surgeon's experience in creating, surveilling and maintaining BB-AVGs, this retrospective study aims to add to the body of literature in assessing patency outcomes of BB-AVGs.

METHODS

We identified 57 BB-AVGs that met inclusion criteria and were created between October 6, 2005 and May 1, 2019 by a single surgeon in 54 patients. We analyzed primary failures, patency, complications and interventions. Patency rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The incidence of complications and interventions were expressed as number of events per person-year.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients (median age of 65 years) were analyzed. Primary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 20.4% 7.4%, and 5.0%. Primary assisted patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 46.7%, 33.5%, and 15.1%. The secondary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 81.8%, 63.8%, and 60.1%, respectively. The incidence of complications and interventions was 2.164 per person-year. Most complications and interventions were due to stenosis (1.202 per person-year) or thrombosis (0.802 per person-year).

CONCLUSION

In patients with poor superficial veins, the brachial vein is a reasonable alternative to use as the venous outflow. However, in order to achieve acceptable patency rates, close monitoring of the VA, as well as aggressive treatment of complications within the brachial vein is necessary. Overall, the BB-AVG should be considered in patients who lack adequate superficial veins and require preservation of the more proximal veins.

A systematic review of the brachial vein arteriovenous fistulas as a viable option for haemodialysis access

OBJECTIVES

International guidelines recommend the use of autogenous vascular access. Where suitable superficial veins are unavailable deeper veins may be used as an option. In most cases, basilic veins are used when cephalic veins are unavailable; arteriovenous fistulas using the brachial vein from the deep venous network are rare. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of the available literature evaluating the use of the brachial vein in arteriovenous fistulas.

METHODS

Systematic literature search of electronic databases in accordance with PRISMA was conducted. The primary outcomes of this study were primary and secondary patency rates for brachial vein arteriovenous fistulas; the secondary outcomes were the rates of access thrombosis, steal syndrome, pseudo-aneurysm and infection.

RESULTS

The 1-year primary, assisted, and secondary patency was recorded at (24%-77%), (45%-85%) and (45%-96%), respectively. The 2-year primary, assisted and secondary patency rate was recorded at (12%-46%), (19%-75%) and (19%-92%), respectively. However, the consistency regarding the reports and definitions used were highly variable. The incidence rate of infection, thrombosis and steal syndrome was 5% (0%-12%), 15.9% (9.5%-35%) and 3% (2%-6%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Available studies support the use of brachial veins as a reliable access option in patients with non-accessible superficial veins where an autologous option is required.

The forearm arteriovenous graft between the brachial artery and the brachial vein as a reliable dialysis vascular access for patients with inadequate superficial veins

OBJECTIVE

The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is recommended as the preferred hemodialysis access. However, placing an AVF in all patients may result in poor access outcomes and increased central venous catheter (CVC) use because of increased comorbid conditions, age, and suboptimal vessels. In patients with inadequate superficial veins for AVFs, the use of the brachial veins for creation of forearm arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) has received limited attention. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate outcomes of forearm brachial-brachial AVGs (BB-AVGs) placed in patients with poor superficial veins.

METHODS

We identified 111 BB-AVGs created in 111 consecutive patients, using standard-walled polytetrafluoroethylene grafts, between January 2010 and December 2015. After excluding 6 patients (non-dialysis initiation, missing information, and death within 1 month), we included 105 patients from 21 dialysis centers. We analyzed primary failures, time to cannulation, patency, complications, and revisions. Patency rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The incidence of complications and revisions was expressed as number of events per person-year.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients (median age, 69 years) were followed up for a median time of 21.2 months (interquartile range, 9.2-36.5 months). Of the patients, 72.4% were on chronic hemodialysis and had previously undergone one or more access procedures. At the time of BB-AVG placement, prior accesses were 39 AVFs, 20 tunneled CVCs, and 17 AVGs. BB-AVG rates of primary failure and revision before cannulation were 7.6% and 5.7%, respectively. BB-AVGs were cannulated after a median time of 3.4 weeks (interquartile range, 2.8-4.1 weeks). Primary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 49.5%, 29.5%, and 19.5%. Secondary patency rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 76.3%, 62.7%, and 54.6%. After cannulation, the incidence of complications and revisions was 1.054 and 0.649 per person-year, respectively. Most complications and interventions were due to thrombosis (0.527 per person-year) or stenosis (0.381 per person-year) and related interventions (0.490 per person-year). A minority of patients experienced AVG infections (0.052 per person-year), with only two requiring access removal.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with poor superficial veins, the forearm BB-AVG is a reliable access because of low access-related morbidity and considerable long-term access survival. BB-AVG placement has the advantage of preserving proximal vessels. In these patients, such an approach can delay both rapid exhaustion of vascular sites and early recourse to CVC permanent use.

Comparison among Transposed Brachiobasilic, Brachiobrachial Arteriovenous Fistulas and Flixene™ Vascular Graft

Objective

To compare the outcomes of 3 upper arm access types: transposed brachiobasilic arteriovenous fistula (BBAVF), autogenous brachial vein–brachial artery access (ABBA), and a new type of ePTFE graft (Flixene™ graft) (AVG), in a consecutive series of patients treated in a tertiary centre.

Methods

A prospective, computerized access database was analysed retrospectively to identify all patients undergoing BBAVF, ABBA, or AVG between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2009.

Results

A total of 108 patients were identified; of whom 45 had BBAVF, 15 ABBA, and 48 ePTFE brachioaxillary AVG. Early failure was similar in all 3 groups. The 18–month functional patency rates for the ABBAs, BBAVFs, and grafts were 27%, 51%, and 55%, respectively. The median time to first use for AVGs was significantly shorter (p<0.0001). Complications were not more frequent in AVGs than ABBAs and BBAVFs (p=0.127). The total number of access interventions was similar between the AVG and ABBA groups (p=0.58), but it was significantly higher in the AVG group compared with the BBAVF group (p<0.0001).

Conclusions

This study supports the current recommendations of the NKF Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative for using BBAVFs as third choice after radiocephalic and brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas. We also showed good results with a new type of prosthetic graft (Flixene™ graft) that allows cannulation within days of implantation. We now favour the use of this graft instead of basilic vein transposition in elderly patients with short life expectancy and urgent need of renal access.

Venae Comitantes as a Potential Vascular Resource to Create Native Arteriovenous Fistulae

Purpose

The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) represents the gold standard for hemodialysis (HD) vascular access. In some critical cases, use of the deep venous circle may represent an alternative approach and venae comitantes could be employed for this purpose.

Methods

Sixty patients with chronic renal failure in which the deep venous circle was used to create an AVF were identified; of the 48 who had a direct anastomosis between the brachial artery and vena comitans, 42 had a long-term follow-up (mean follow-up 59 weeks), while six were lost to follow-up.

Results

Immediate success (patency and palpable thrill) was achieved in 88% of cases (primary and early failure 12%). Primary accessibility rate was 62%, while 11 patients required a second surgical approach to make the vein accessible to needling. Secondary accessibility rate of 71% was due to surgical revisions. In the 80–week observation period, the complication rate was 10% with irreversible loss of the AVF in all these cases. Cumulative patency was 71% at the 80th week. Including all 42 patients, technical and functional success rate, defined as vein accessibility to needling and chance of an adequate HD treatment, was 62%.

Conclusions

AVF employing venae comitantes may represent a suitable alternative in the absence of other vascular accesses for HD.

Two-Stage Combined Basilic-Brachial Vein Transposition

In the present report, we describe a two-stage technique of combined basilic and brachial vein transposition. Our patient had a brachial-basilic vein fistula created, but during the second stage for the transposition, a low basilic-brachial vein confluence was found. Instead of abandoning the procedure, the brachial vein was mobilized and transposed to primarily constitute a usable fistula, which subsequently was successfully used for hemodialysis. A detailed description of our technique is provided. Surgeons should be aware of this alternative procedure to maximize fistula creation rates.