Pre-emptive or reactive treatment, angioplasty or stent-graft? The outcome for interventions for venous stenosis in early-cannulation arteriovenous grafts

Early-cannulation arteriovenous grafts: Multidisciplinary learning is essential to optimize outcomes

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.

The impact of stent-graft sizing on venous stenosis re-intervention and arteriovenous graft patency: Free-floating stent outflow is associated with improved outcomes

BACKGROUND

Early cannulation arteriovenous grafts (ecAVG) for dialysis access are limited by reintervention for venous stenosis (VS) despite their good initial patency. Whilst stent-grafts (SG) have shown promise, the optimal sizing is unclear. Therefore, this study aims to determine if outflow vein diameter, SG diameter or these relative to each other (V:Sr) alters outcomes, and if so, which is more important.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed of Gore® Acuseal® ecAVGs with VS treated with Gore® Viabahn® SG over a 7-year period. Primary patency (PP), time to thrombosis and functional patency were analysed by SG length/diameter, vein diameter and V:Sr.

RESULTS

We identified 114 ecAVGs with median follow-up 492 days (IQR 189-770). SG length and diameter did not correlate with PP, however, there was a significant relationship between vein diameter and PP (RR = 0.901 (0.832-0.975), p = 0.01) and between V:Sr and PP (RR = 0.462 (0.255-0.838), x2 = 5.866, p = 0.0015). The optimal V:Sr was ⩾1.4 (i.e. vein diameter at least 40% greater than the stent-graft; or 'free-floating' stent outflow) (RR = 2.759 (1.670-4.558), p < 0.001), translating to a difference in median PP of 252 versus 496 days (IQR: 188-316; 322-670). On multivariate analysis, absolute vein diameter lost significance, whilst V:Sr remained an independently significant predictor of PP (RR = 3.247 (1.560-6.759), p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of the SG outflow into a relatively larger segment of vein was associated with a significant increase in PP independent of the absolute vein diameter. This suggests that larger calibre SG which are apposed to the vein wall are not required for optimal primary patency, and indeed should be actively avoided. Instead, a 'free-floating' stent outflow which is undersized relative to the recipient vein (whilst maintaining a minimum anchoring calibre) is recommended where possible. This should be considered during intervention and may require selection of longer devices, where practical, to bring the stent outflow into a larger vein segment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3a, Non-randomised controlled cohort/follow-up study.

Screening and surveillance of venous stenosis in AVG: Is it time to rethink our assumptions?

Guidelines make no firm recommendations about surveillance of arteriovenous grafts as several randomised trials (RCT) have not shown a clear benefit in patency. However a more thorough review of these RCT based on epidemiological principles reveals significant limitations. In particular a key weakness of these older studies is the interventions performed for venous stenosis detected that was largely angioplasty. However, the observational data of modern stent-grafts shows a clear benefit over angioplasty, and thus seems to suggest that a modern well considered RCT is now mandated.