Surgical Treatment of Cephalic Arch Stenosis by Central Transposition of the Cephalic Vein

Management of cephalic arch stenosis in hemodialysis access: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cephalic arch stenosis (CAS) is often recurrent, resistant to treatment and the intervention outcome is not well validated so far. We purposed to assess the clinical outcomes of CAS treatment in patients with hemodialysis access.

METHODS

Electronic bibliographic sources were searched up to December 4 2023 to identify studies reported outcome after treating CAS. Direct and indirect evidence was combined to compare odds ratios (OR) and surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves across the different treatment modalities through meta-analysis and network meta-analyses (NMA). This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-P. The review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022296513).

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 15 non-RCTs were included in the analysis. The study population differed in fistula type, restenosis or thrombosis, and significant heterogeneity was observed among the publications. The risk of bias was low to serious. Meta-analysis found no significant difference between DCB and PTA in primary patency at 6 and 12 months (OR 1.16 and 0.60, respectively; low certainty of evidence). Favorable result with STG compared to stent or PTA at 3, 6, and 12 month was observed (OR 4.28, 5.13, and 13.12, and 4.28, 5.13, 13.12, respectively; low certainty of evidence). Regarding primary patency, the treatment rankings, from highest to lowest, were STG (92.7%), transposition (76.0%), stent (67.5%), DCB (46.3%), and PTA (64.5%) at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Despite data limitations, the low-quality evidence suggests that STG may merit consideration as a primary treatment option when all alternatives are applicable, given their potential for better primary patency and higher treatment ranking.

Outcomes of Surgical and Endovascular Treatment for Cephalic Arch Stenosis in Proximal Arteriovenous Fistula

Purpose

The cephalic arch is a significant site of stenosis in proximal arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) that contributes to access dysfunction and thrombosis. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of surgical treatment (ST) and endovascular treatment (ET) for cephalic arch stenosis (CAS).

Materials and Methods

A total of 62 patients with proximal AVF who underwent CAS revision using either ST or ET were enrolled between January 2018 and March 2023. In the ET group, only the initial ET following AVF formation was considered, to mitigate bias. In the ST group, central transposition of the native AVF (transposition group) or interposition of the prosthetic graft into the proximal basilic or axillary vein (interposition group) was performed. We evaluated primary and functional patency based on these groups and calculated the number of patency loss events after CAS treatment.

Results

Of the 62 patients, 38 (61%) were male, with a mean age of 66.4 years. ST was performed in 26 (42%) patients, including transposition in 16 and interposition in 10, whereas ET was administered to 36 patients during the study period. Among the ST recipients, 42% had a history of ET for CAS. The incidence of AVF thrombosis was marginally higher in the ST group than in the ET group (39% vs. 19%, P=0.098). The primary patency rates at 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years were 87%, 87%, and 66% in the transposition group; 45%, 23%, and 11% in the interposition group; and 66%, 49%, and 17% in the ET group, respectively. Notably, the primary patency of the transposition group was significantly higher than that of the interposition (P=0.001) and ET groups (P=0.016). The frequency of patency loss events per person-year after the initial revision was 0.40, 0.52, and 1.42 in the transposition, interposition, and ET groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Transposition exhibited the most favorable primary patency rate and the lowest number of subsequent patency loss events during follow-up despite the higher rates of AVF thrombosis and previous ET at presentation. Consequently, transposition should be actively considered in eligible patients with CAS.

Contemporary review of management techniques for cephalic arch stenosis in hemodialysis

The type of hemodialysis access and its preservation impact the quality of life and survival of patients undergoing hemodialysis. Vascular access complications are among the top causes of morbidity, hospitalization, and catheter use, with significant economic burden. Poor maturation and stenosis continue to be key impediments to upper arm arteriovenous fistula feasibility. Cephalic arch is a common location for vascular access dysfunction due to its distinctive anatomy, complex valves, and biochemical alterations attributable to renal failure. Understanding cephalic arch stenosis is critical due to its high prevalence and treatment failure. The appropriate management option is highly debatable and mostly dependent on patient characteristics and interventionist's preference. Current options include, percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty, stent grafts, bare metal stents, cutting balloon angioplasty, endovascular banding, and surgical procedures. This article discusses the etiologies of cephalic arch stenosis as well as currents trends in management including endovascular and surgical options.

Dual outflow upper arm arteriovenous fistula: An effective technique to prevent cephalic arch stenosis

Cephalic arch stenosis (CAS) is critical point to maintain functional arteriovenous fistula (AVF) in patients undergoing hemodialysis with brachio-cephalic AVFs. In this study, we aimed to determine the effectiveness of dual outflow (cephalic and basilic veins) as a surgical method to prevent CAS. Between July 2016 and December 2019, 369 patients underwent upper arm AVF creation. Among them the 251 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study. Two hundred seven underwent brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula (BCAVF) and 44 underwent brachio-cephalicbasilic arteriovenous fistula (BCBAVF). From the 251 patients, diabetes mellitus (66.7% vs 36.4%, P < .001) and hypertension (91.3% vs 75%, P = .002) were more common in the patient group who underwent BCAVF surgery; however, the difference in volume flow to the fistula did not differ between the 2 groups. CAS (30.4% vs 9.1%, P = .004) and fistula occlusion (15.9% vs 4.5%, P = .048) were likely to occur in the BCAVF group. The primary patency rates at 12 months were 74.3% and 86.4% for the BCAVFs and BCBAVFs, respectively (P = .075). The primary-assisted patency rates at 12 months were 87.0% for BCAVFs and 93.2% for BCBAVFs, respectively (P = .145). Secondary patency rates at 12 months were 92.2% for BCAVFs and 93.2% for BCBAVFs, respectively (P = .023). Compared to BCAVF, traditional upper arm AVF, upper arm AVF with cephalic and basilic vein dual drainage can be optimal surgical method to preventing CAS.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Dialysis Fistula Malfunction

The creation and maintenance of a dialysis access is vital for the reduction of morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment for end stage renal disease patients. One's longevity on dialysis is directly dependent upon the quality of dialysis. This quality hinges on the integrity and reliability of the access to the patient's vascular system. All methods of dialysis access will eventually result in dialysis dysfunction and failure. Arteriovenous access dysfunction includes 3 distinct classes of events, namely thrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, nonthrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, and infectious complications. The restoration of any form of arteriovenous access dysfunction may be supported by diagnostic imaging, clinical consultation, percutaneous interventional procedures, surgical management, or a combination of these methods. This document provides a rigorous evaluation of how variants of each form of dysfunction may be appraised and approached systematically. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Surgical Referral for Hemodialysis Access Maintenance

Hemodialysis access is the lifeline for end-stage renal disease patients. However, dialysis access is associated with a host of complications, including thrombosis, recurrent stenosis, infection, aneurysmal changes and bleeding. Although endovascular therapy remains the first-line treatment owing to its less invasive nature, there are certain situations where surgical referral is recommended or even necessary. Regardless, management of dialysis access complications requires a multidisciplinary approach. Interventional radiologists should be familiar with the appropriate timing for surgical referral to better serve the complex patient population.

Swing segment stenosis: An unresolved challenge

The native arteriovenous fistula is considered the gold standard among all dialysis access options. Compared with alternatives such as grafts and central venous catheters, their use is associated with a lower risk of infective and thrombotic complications. This leads to better patient outcomes and reduced healthcare-associated costs. Recognizing these advantages, there is a global drive to increase the creation and use of such fistulas in hemodialysis patients. Swing segment stenosis is a common problem encountered with the creation and use of these fistulas that can hurt their maturation and longevity. A "swing segment" in an arteriovenous fistula is defined as a segment of vein that pursues a sharp, curved course. Due to poorly understood reasons, these swing segments tend to develop stenotic lesions that are extremely challenging to treat. This review aims to provide an overview of the pathophysiology, incidence, management, and prevention of these swing segment lesions. We believe that such knowledge will be useful for clinicians who deal with dialysis access creation and maintenance.

ASDIN white paper: Management of cephalic arch stenosis endorsed by the American Society of Diagnostic and Interventional Nephrology

Brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) makeup approximately one third of prevalent dialysis vascular accesses. The most common cause of malfunction with this access is cephalic arch stenosis (CAS). The accepted requirement for treatment of a venous stenosis lesion is ⩾50% stenosis associated with hemodynamically abnormalities. However, the correlation between percentage stenosis and a clinically significant decrease in access blood flow (Qa) is low. The critical parameter is the absolute minimal luminal diameter (MLD) of the lesion. This is the parameter that exerts the key restrictive effect on Qa and results in hemodynamic and functional implications for the access. CAS is the result of low wall shear stress (WSS) resulting from the effects of increased blood flow and the unique anatomical configuration of the CAS. Decrease in WSS has a linear relationship to increased blood flow velocity and neointimal hyperplasia exhibits an inverse relationship with WSS. The result is a stenotic lesion. The presence of downstream venous stenosis causes an inflow-outflow mismatch resulting in increased pressure within the access. Qa in this situation may be decreased, increased, or within a normal range. Over time, the increased intraluminal pressure can result in marked aneurysmal changes within the AVF, difficulties with cannulation and the dialysis treatment, and ultimately, increasing risk of access thrombosis. Complete characterization of the lesion both hemodynamically and anatomically should be the first step in developing a strategy for management. This requires both access flow measurement and angiographic imaging. Patients with CAS present a relatively broad spectrum as relates to both of these parameters. These data should be used to determine whether primary treatment of CAS should be directed toward the anatomical lesion (small MLD and low Qa) or the pathophysiology (large MLD and high Qa).

Left innominate vein stenosis treated with graft replacement with concomitant cardiac surgery

Left innominate vein stenosis is a serious complication that causes massive venous hypertension and vascular access failure in patients requiring hemodialysis. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty has been the standard treatment strategy; however, the outcome has been unsatisfactory, with a low primary patency rate. We present the case of a 49-year-old man with symptomatic left innominate vein stenosis that was successfully treated with graft replacement concomitantly with aortic valve replacement via median sternotomy. During surgery, appropriate cardiopulmonary bypass circulation should be established to avoid cerebral venous hypertension, which can cause irreversible brain damage.

KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update

The National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) has provided evidence-based guidelines for hemodialysis vascular access since 1996. Since the last update in 2006, there has been a great accumulation of new evidence and sophistication in the guidelines process. The 2019 update to the KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access is a comprehensive document intended to assist multidisciplinary practitioners care for chronic kidney disease patients and their vascular access. New topics include the end-stage kidney disease "Life-Plan" and related concepts, guidance on vascular access choice, new targets for arteriovenous access (fistulas and grafts) and central venous catheters, management of specific complications, and renewed approaches to some older topics. Appraisal of the quality of the evidence was independently conducted by using a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and interpretation and application followed the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks. As applicable, each guideline statement is accompanied by rationale/background information, a detailed justification, monitoring and evaluation guidance, implementation considerations, special discussions, and recommendations for future research.

The axillary vein and its tributaries are not in the mirror image of the axillary artery and its branches

INTRODUCTION

The axillary and cephalic veins are used for various clinical purposes but their anatomy is not fully understood. Increased knowledge and information about them as well as superficial veins in the upper arm would be useful.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to contribute to the literature regarding the anatomy of the venous drainage of the upper extremity.

METHODS

The veins of forty upper extremities from twenty one adult cadavers were injected and their axillary regions dissected. The course and pattern of drainage of the venous tributaries in the axillary region were identified and recorded.

RESULTS

The basilic, brachial, subscapular, lateral thoracic and superior thoracic veins drained mainly into the axillary vein, in common with most textbook descriptions. However, the thoracoacromial veins were observed to drain into the cephalic vein in 70.0% of upper limbs. In addition, a venous channel connecting the distal part and proximal part of the axilla was found along the posterolateral wall of the axilla in 77.5% of the upper limbs. In 95.0% of upper limbs, we discovered a superficial vein which ran from the axillary base and drained directly into the axillary vein.

CONCLUSION

The veins from the inferomedial part of the axilla drain into the axillary vein, whereas the veins from the superolateral part of the axilla drain into the cephalic vein. The venous drainage of the axilla is variable and in common with venous drainage elsewhere, does not necessarily follow the pattern of the arterial supply.

Current treatment status and medical costs for hemodialysis vascular access based on analysis of the Korean Health Insurance Database

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The Republic of Korea is a country where the hemodialysis population is growing rapidly. It is believed that the numbers of treatments related to vascular access-related complications are also increasing. This study investigated the current status of treatment and medical expenses for vascular access in Korean patients on hemodialysis.

METHODS

This was a descriptive observational study. We inspected the insurance claims of patients with chronic kidney disease who underwent hemodialysis between January 2008 and December 2016. We calculated descriptive statistics of the frequencies and medical expenses of procedures for vascular access.

RESULTS

The national medical expenses for access-related treatment were 7.12 billion KRW (equivalent to 6.36 million USD) in 2008, and these expenses increased to 42.12 billion KRW (equivalent to 37.67 million USD) in 2016. The population of hemodialysis patients, the annual frequency of access-related procedures, and the total medical cost for access-related procedures increased by 1.6-, 2.6-, and 5.9-fold, respectively, over the past 9 years. The frequency and costs of access care increased as the number of patients on hemodialysis increased. The increase in vascular access-related costs has largely been driven by increased numbers of percutaneous angioplasty.

CONCLUSION

The increasing proportion of medical costs for percutaneous angioplasty represents a challenge in the management of end-stage renal disease in Korea. It is essential to identify the clinical and physiological aspects as well as anatomical abnormalities before planning angioplasty. A timely surgical correction could be a viable option to control the rapid growth of access-related medical expenses.

Spanish Clinical Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis

Vascular access for haemodialysis is key in renal patients both due to its associated morbidity and mortality and due to its impact on quality of life. The process, from the creation and maintenance of vascular access to the treatment of its complications, represents a challenge when it comes to decision-making, due to the complexity of the existing disease and the diversity of the specialities involved. With a view to finding a common approach, the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology [S.E.N.], vascular surgery [SEACV], vascular and interventional radiology [SERAM-SERVEI], infectious diseases [SEIMC] and nephrology nursing [SEDEN]), along with the methodological support of the Cochrane Center, has updated the Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis, published in 2005. These guidelines maintain a similar structure, in that they review the evidence without compromising the educational aspects. However, on one hand, they provide an update to methodology development following the guidelines of the GRADE system in order to translate this systematic review of evidence into recommendations that facilitate decision-making in routine clinical practice, and, on the other hand, the guidelines establish quality indicators which make it possible to monitor the quality of healthcare.

Surgical Treatment of Cephalic Arch Problems in Arteriovenous Fistulas: A Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Cephalic arch problems, mainly stenosis, are a common cause of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) failure, and the most effective treatment is yet to be clearly defined. Restenosis usually occurs soon, and multiple interventions become necessary to maintain patency and functionality. The authors present the experience of their center with cephalic vein transposition in a group of patients with different problems involving the cephalic arch.

METHODS

After consultation of the medical records, an observational retrospective analysis was performed to evaluate the outcomes of surgical treatment in cephalic arch problems of AVFs treated at the author's center between January 2013 and December 2015. The considered outcomes were endovascular intervention rate, thrombosis rate, and primary and secondary patencies.

RESULTS

Seven patients were treated by venovenostomy with transposition of the cephalic arch and anastomosis to the axillary vein. The average patient age was 72 years (59-81), and most patients were female (71%) and diabetic (71%). All accesses were brachiocephalic AVFs with a mean duration of 4 years (1-7). The underlying problems were intrinsic cephalic arch stenosis (n = 5), entrapment of the cephalic vein (n = 1), and clinically significant vein tortuosity at the cephalic arch (n = 1). These last 2 problems conducted to a surgical approach as first-line therapy instead of endovascular intervention, the initial treatment in the other 5 cases (all with high-pressure balloons, with cutting balloon in one case). Previous thrombotic episodes were reported in 57% of the patients. The mean access flow before surgical intervention was 425 mL/min (350-1,500). No complications related with the surgical procedure were reported. One patient underwent surgical thrombectomy after AVF thrombosis, followed by transposition of the vein. In another case, a simultaneous flow reduction was performed. Most of the patients on dialysis (5/6) used the AVF after surgery. After a mean follow-up period of 9 months (1-22), surgical treatment was associated with a reduction in endovascular intervention rate (1.9 interventions per patient-year presurgery versus 0.4 postsurgery; P < 0.05) and thrombosis rate (0.93 thrombotic episodes per patient-year presurgery versus 0.17 postsurgery; P < 0.05). The problems leading to endovascular reintervention were as follows: new venous anastomosis stenosis (57%), axillary vein stenosis (29%), and swing-point stenosis (14%). Primary and secondary patencies at 6 months were 57% and 71%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this group of patients with cephalic arch problems and multiple previous procedures, surgical treatment was associated with a reduction in endovascular intervention and thrombosis rate but did not avoid reintervention. Facing the complexity and multiplicity of the cephalic arch complications, treatment should be individually decided.

Cephalic vein transposition is a durable approach to managing cephalic arch stenosis

INTRODUCTION

The proximal cephalic vein that enters the axillary vein (cephalic arch) is a common site of stenosis in patients with upper extremity arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis (HD). In this study, we present the outcomes of a series of cephalic vein transposition, to determine its utility in the setting of refractory arch stenosis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing cephalic vein transposition to manage refractory cephalic arch stenosis from January 1, 2008 to August 31, 2015. Demographics, past medical history, access history of the patients as well as procedural details of the surgery to the stenotic segment, patency of the access, and the need for subsequent interventions were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients underwent a cephalic vein transposition during the study period. The patients undergoing cephalic transposition had their current access for an average of 3.0 ± 2.6 years and had an average of 2.3 ± 0.9 interventions on the access prior to the surgery. Complications from the surgery were uncommon (8.7%) and no patient required a temporary tunneled dialysis catheter. The re-intervention rate was 0.2 ± 0.2 interventions per patient per year. At two years, primary patency was 70.9% and cumulative patency was 94.7% for the patients with cephalic transposition.

CONCLUSIONS

Cephalic vein transposition is safe and effective treatment for cephalic arch stenosis without interrupting utilization of the access. The surgical approach to stenosis of the proximal cephalic vein is effective, requires minimal re-interventions, and should be considered for isolated, refractory cephalic arch stenosis in mature arteriovenous fistulas.

Management of Transposed Arteriovenous Fistula Swing Point Stenosis at the Basilic Vein Angle of Transposition by Stent Grafts

Introduction

Transposed basilic vein arteriovenous fistulas suffer from stenosis at their basilic angle of transposition (BAT). This lesion exhibits frequent recurrence after angioplasty. The primary goal of this study was to determine the effect of stent-graft placement on BAT lesion- and access-patency. The secondary goals were to determine the frequency of intervention pre- and post-stent placement and stent-associated stenosis.

Methods

Thirty-seven cases had stent-grafts placed at their BAT to manage stenosis. Cases served as their own controls by analyzing their lesion- and access-patency pre- and post-stent placement. Student's t-test was used for analysis of continuous variables. Categorical variables were evaluated by Fisher's exact test. Tests were considered significant when p was ≤0.05.

Results

At 6 and 12 months, pre-stent lesion primary patency rates were 29% and 3%, and post-stent were 57% and 40%, respectively. Lesion primary assisted patency rates were 39% and 13%, and post-stent were 91% and 80%, respectively. At 6 and 12 months, pre-stent access primary patency rates were 29% and 3%, and post-stent were 26% and 19%, respectively. Pre-stent primary access assisted patency rates were 36% and 10%, and post-stent were 82% and 75%, respectively. Lesion intervention rates averaged 0.47/month pre-stent and 0.13/month post-stent. Access intervention rate averaged 0.50/month pre-stent, and 0.15/month post-stent. Stent-associated stenosis was seen in 23 cases.

Conclusions

Treatment of BAT stenosis with stent-grafts had positive impact on the target lesion and the dialysis access circuit.

A rare anatomic variant of a single-conduit supraclavicular cephalic arch draining into the external jugular vein presenting with recurrent arteriovenous fistula stenosis in a hemodialysis patient

The cephalic arch is a common location of stenosis, especially in brachiocephalic fistulas. The cephalic arch has a number of anatomic variations. Cephalic arch stenoses are often resistant and have poor primary patency. Here we describe an unusual case of a hemodialysis patient with a single-conduit supraclavicular cephalic arch draining into the external jugular vein presenting with recurrent cephalic arch stenoses and external jugular vein stenosis. In our view, extrinsic compression by the clavicle may contribute to the high rate of recurrence, the lack of complete dilation of even high-pressure balloons, and a theoretically heightened risk of rupture when cutting balloons are used.