Development and validation of a risk score to prioritize patients for evaluation of access stenosis

Association of risk stratification score with dialysis vascular access stenosis

BACKGROUNDS

Clinical monitoring is the recommended standard for identifying dialysis access dysfunction; however, clinical monitoring requires skill and training, which is challenging for understaffed clinics and overburdened healthcare personnel. A vascular access risk stratification score was recently proposed to assist in detecting dialysis access dysfunction.

PURPOSE

Our objective was to evaluate the utility of using vascular access risk scores to assess venous stenosis in hemodialysis vascular accesses.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled adult patients who were receiving hemodialysis through an arteriovenous access and who had a risk score ⩽3 (low-risk) or ⩾8 (high-risk). We compared the occurrence of access stenosis (>50% on ultrasonography or angiography) between low-risk and high-risk groups and assessed clinical monitoring results for each group.

RESULTS

Of the 38 patients analyzed (18 low-risk; 20 high-risk), 16 (42%) had significant stenosis. Clinical monitoring results were positive in 39% of the low-risk and 60% of the high-risk group (p = 0.19). The high-risk group had significantly higher occurrence of stenosis than the low-risk group (65% vs 17%; p = 0.003). Sensitivity and specificity of a high score for identifying stenosis were 81% and 68%, respectively. The positive predictive value of a high-risk score was 65%, and the negative predictive value was 80%. Only 11 (58%) of 19 subjects with positive clinical monitoring had significant stenosis. In a multivariable model, the high-risk group had seven-fold higher odds of stenosis than the low-risk group (aOR = 7.38; 95% CI, 1.44-37.82; p = 0.02). Positive clinical monitoring results and previous stenotic history were not associated with stenosis. Every unit increase in the score was associated with 34% higher odds of stenosis (aOR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.05-1.70; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A calculated risk score may help predict the development of hemodialysis vascular access stenosis and may provide a simple and reliable objective measure for risk stratification.

Rethinking an effective AV fistula-graft screening program. An "A B C"

The goal of a vascular access screening program is to detect and preemptively correct hemodynamically significant stenosis, however, a practice pattern allowing to implement such a program still remains to be defined. Achieving balance between the increase in access-related procedures by adopting an aggressive screening program, and the risks associated with the absence of any screening program, i.e., failure or abandonment of the arterio-venous access with need for central venous catheter placement, can be extremely challenging. All major guidelines agree about the role of arterio-venous access monitoring, but the way surveillance should be managed is still a controversial issue. Preserving long-term vascular access function should be a goal for all hemodialysis teams, yet it ideally requires a multidisciplinary effort with a monitoring program, calling for a great deal of involvement by hemodialysis health professionals. In this context, the engagement of skilled nurses and the role of patient empowerment with collaborative decision-making may be the key to a successful vascular access screening program. Screening programs should be personalized, shared with the patients, and tailored according to vascular access type and site. In the near future, new devices and the use of artificial intelligence may allow to support interpretation of complex data and lead to the development of prediction models for vascular access failure.