The management of dialysis access thrombosis during the COVID-19 pandemic

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on hemodialysis access thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Delay in care of suspected stenosis or thrombosis can increase the chance of losing a functioning hemodialysis access. Access to care and resources were restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic. To evaluate the impact of the pandemic on arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and arteriovenous graft (AVG) procedures we have assessed the number and success of thrombectomies done before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We examined all AVF and AVG angiograms with and without interventions, including thrombectomies, performed at a single center during April 2017-March 2021 (pre-COVID-19 era) and April 2020-March 2021 (COVID-19 era).

RESULTS

The proportion of procedures that were thrombectomies was higher during the COVID-19 era compared to the pre-COVID-19 era (13.3% vs 8.7%, p = 0.009). The proportion of thrombectomy procedures was higher during COVID-19 for AVF (8.2% vs 3.0%, p < 0.001) but there was no difference for AVG (26.5% vs 27%, p = 0.99). There was a trend toward a higher likelihood of unsuccessful thrombectomy during COVID-19 (33.3% vs 20.4%, p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

More dialysis access thromboses and unsuccessful thrombectomies were noted during the COVID-19 pandemic. This difference could be due to a delay in patients getting procedures to maintain their dialysis accesses.

Implications of COVID-19 Infection on Arteriovenous Fistula Thrombosis

Objective: This study aims to identify and analyze implications of COVID-19 positivity on AVF occlusion, subsequent treatment patterns, and ESRD patient outcomes. Our aim is to provide a quantitative context for vascular access surgeons in order to optimize surgical decision making and minimize patient morbidity. Methods: The de-identified national TriNetX database was queried to extracted all adult patients who had a known AVF between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. From this cohort individuals who also were diagnosed with COVID-19 prior to creation of their AVF were identified. Cohorts were propensity score matched according to age at AVF surgery, gender, ethnicity, diabetes mellitus, nicotine dependence, tobacco use, use of anticoagulant medications, and use of platelet aggregation inhibitors, hypertensive diseases, hyperlipidemia, and prothrombotic states. Results: After propensity score matching there were 5170 patients; 2585 patients in each group. The total patient population had 3023 (58.5%) males and 2147 (41.5%) females. The overall rate of thrombosis of AV fistulas was 300 (11.6%) in the cohort with COVID-19 and 256 (9.9%) in the control group (OR 1.199, CI 1.005-1.43, P =.0453). Open revisions of AVF with thrombectomy were significantly higher in the COVID-19 cohort compared to the non-COVID-19 group (1.5% vs .5% P = .0002, OR 3.199, CI 1.668-6.136). Regarding the time from AVF creation to intervention, the median days for open thrombectomy in COVID-19 patients was 72 vs 105 days in controls. For endovascular thrombectomy, the median was 175 vs 168 days for the COVID-19 and control cohorts respectively. Conclusion: As for this study, there were significant differences in rates of thrombosis and open revisions of recent created AVF, however endovascular interventions remained remarkably low. As noted in this study, the persistent prothrombotic state of patients with a history of COVID-19 may persist beyond the acute infectious period of the disease.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the kidney community: lessons learned and future directions

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected patients with kidney disease, causing significant challenges in disease management, kidney research and trainee education. For patients, increased infection risk and disease severity, often complicated by acute kidney injury, have contributed to high mortality. Clinicians were faced with high clinical demands, resource shortages and novel ethical dilemmas in providing patient care. In this review, we address the impact of COVID-19 on the entire spectrum of kidney care, including acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, dialysis and transplantation, trainee education, disparities in health care, changes in health care policies, moral distress and the patient perspective. Based on current evidence, we provide a framework for the management and support of patients with kidney disease, infection mitigation strategies, resource allocation and support systems for the nephrology workforce.

COVID-19 in dialysis: clinical impact, immune response, prevention, and treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic has profound adverse effects on the population on dialysis. Patients requiring dialysis are at an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and many have experienced psychological distress as well as delayed or suboptimal care. COVID-19 survivors have prolonged viral shedding, but generally develop a robust and long-lasting humoral immune response that correlates with initial disease severity. However, protection against reinfection is incomplete. A growing body of evidence reveals delayed and blunted immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Administration of a third dose within 1 to 2 months of prime-boost vaccination significantly increases antibody levels, in particular in patients with poor initial responses. Patients on dialysis have inferior immune responses to adenoviral vector vaccines than to mRNA vaccines. The immunogenicity of the mRNA-1273 vaccine is markedly better than that of the BNT162b2 vaccine, most likely by virtue of its higher mRNA content. Despite suboptimal immune responses in patients on dialysis, preliminary data suggest that vaccination partially protects against infection and severe disease requiring hospitalization. However, progressive waning of immunity and emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants with a high potential of immune escape call for a booster dose in all patients on dialysis 4 to 6 months after prime-boost vaccination. Patients with persistent poor vaccine responses may be candidates for primary prophylaxis strategies. In the absence of specific data in patients on dialysis, therapeutic strategies in the event of established COVID-19 must be extrapolated from evidence obtained in the population not on dialysis. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies may be an attractive option after a high-risk exposure or during the early course of infection.