Comparative study of modified HeRO grafts using bovine carotid artery as conduits versus polytetrafluoreythylene.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Daniel Kong, Francisco Lim, Gabriel Jabbour, Emerito Asuncion, Farris Hakki, Jesse Garcia
{"title":"Comparative study of modified HeRO grafts using bovine carotid artery as conduits versus polytetrafluoreythylene.","authors":"Daniel Kong, Francisco Lim, Gabriel Jabbour, Emerito Asuncion, Farris Hakki, Jesse Garcia","doi":"10.1177/11297298251343332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Hemodialysis reliable outflow (HeRO) device is currently the only option for hemodialysis for catheter-dependent dialysis patients with central venous stenosis who are poor candidates of fistulas and grafts. The proprietary HeRO device is connected to a standard polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE) conduit. Previous studies have showed decreased rates of infection using bovine carotid artery graft (BCAG) compared to the PTFE graft for arteriovenous grafts (AVG). This is the first study to compare the use of BCAG to PTFE for HeRO grafts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From Jan 2015 to Dec 2022 we inserted 83 HeRO grafts on ESRD patients, 40 cases used the standard PTFE graft as the conduit connected to the HeRO component and 43 cases used the BCAG grafts. We did a 2 year follow up review on all the patients using the Kaplan Meier's survival analysis to compare the primary, primary-assisted patency and secondary patency, graft lifespan comparison, infection and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PTFE was associated with significantly increased rates of infection compared to BCAG (40% vs 16.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.026). Comparing BCAG versus PTFE, primary patency was 58.4% versus 59% at 6 months (<i>p</i> = 0.82) and 34.9% versus 34.1% at 1 year (<i>p</i> = 0.88). Primary-assisted patency was 88.6% versus 80.6% at 6 months (<i>p</i> = 0.35) and 69.7% versus 54.6% at 1 year (<i>p</i> = 0.21). Secondary patency was 94.3% versus 85.7% (<i>p</i> = 0.23) at 6 months and 82.4% versus 59.1% at 1 year (<i>p</i> = 0.12).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bovine carotid artery grafts are comparable in primary patency, primary-assisted patency, and secondary patency versus PTFE. Number of interventions required and done were similar in both groups. BCAG was associated with lower rates of infection compared to PTFE. BCAG is an acceptable conduit for HeRO graft and may be a better option compared to PTFE.</p>","PeriodicalId":56113,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Access","volume":" ","pages":"11297298251343332"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Access","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298251343332","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Hemodialysis reliable outflow (HeRO) device is currently the only option for hemodialysis for catheter-dependent dialysis patients with central venous stenosis who are poor candidates of fistulas and grafts. The proprietary HeRO device is connected to a standard polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE) conduit. Previous studies have showed decreased rates of infection using bovine carotid artery graft (BCAG) compared to the PTFE graft for arteriovenous grafts (AVG). This is the first study to compare the use of BCAG to PTFE for HeRO grafts.

Methods: From Jan 2015 to Dec 2022 we inserted 83 HeRO grafts on ESRD patients, 40 cases used the standard PTFE graft as the conduit connected to the HeRO component and 43 cases used the BCAG grafts. We did a 2 year follow up review on all the patients using the Kaplan Meier's survival analysis to compare the primary, primary-assisted patency and secondary patency, graft lifespan comparison, infection and complications.

Results: PTFE was associated with significantly increased rates of infection compared to BCAG (40% vs 16.3%, p = 0.026). Comparing BCAG versus PTFE, primary patency was 58.4% versus 59% at 6 months (p = 0.82) and 34.9% versus 34.1% at 1 year (p = 0.88). Primary-assisted patency was 88.6% versus 80.6% at 6 months (p = 0.35) and 69.7% versus 54.6% at 1 year (p = 0.21). Secondary patency was 94.3% versus 85.7% (p = 0.23) at 6 months and 82.4% versus 59.1% at 1 year (p = 0.12).

Conclusions: Bovine carotid artery grafts are comparable in primary patency, primary-assisted patency, and secondary patency versus PTFE. Number of interventions required and done were similar in both groups. BCAG was associated with lower rates of infection compared to PTFE. BCAG is an acceptable conduit for HeRO graft and may be a better option compared to PTFE.

以牛颈动脉与聚四氟乙烯为导管的改良HeRO移植物的比较研究。
目的:血液透析可靠流出(HeRO)装置是目前中心静脉狭窄的导管依赖透析患者血液透析的唯一选择,这些患者不适合瘘管和移植物。专有的HeRO设备连接到标准聚四氟乙烯(PTFE)管道。先前的研究表明,与用于动静脉移植物(AVG)的聚四氟乙烯移植物相比,使用牛颈动脉移植物(BCAG)的感染率降低。这是第一个比较BCAG和PTFE用于HeRO移植物的研究。方法:2015年1月至2022年12月,我们在ESRD患者中植入HeRO移植物83例,其中40例采用标准PTFE移植物作为连接HeRO组件的导管,43例采用BCAG移植物。我们对所有患者进行了为期2年的随访,使用Kaplan Meier生存分析来比较原发性,原发性辅助通畅和继发性通畅,移植物寿命比较,感染和并发症。结果:与BCAG相比,PTFE与感染发生率显著增加相关(40% vs 16.3%, p = 0.026)。BCAG与PTFE比较,6个月时原发性通畅率分别为58.4%和59% (p = 0.82), 1年时为34.9%和34.1% (p = 0.88)。6个月时,原发性辅助通畅率为88.6%对80.6% (p = 0.35), 1年通畅率为69.7%对54.6% (p = 0.21)。6个月时继发通畅率为94.3%对85.7% (p = 0.23), 1年时为82.4%对59.1% (p = 0.12)。结论:与PTFE相比,牛颈动脉移植物在原发性通畅、原发性辅助通畅和继发性通畅方面具有可比性。两组所需和已完成的干预措施数量相似。与PTFE相比,BCAG与较低的感染率相关。BCAG是一种可接受的HeRO接枝导管,与PTFE相比可能是更好的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Vascular Access
Journal of Vascular Access 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
31.60%
发文量
181
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vascular Access (JVA) is issued six times per year; it considers the publication of original manuscripts dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of vascular access. In addition reviews, case reports and clinical trials are welcome, as well as papers dedicated to more practical aspects covering new devices and techniques. All contributions, coming from all over the world, undergo the peer-review process. The Journal of Vascular Access is divided into independent sections, each led by Editors of the highest scientific level: • Dialysis • Oncology • Interventional radiology • Nutrition • Nursing • Intensive care Correspondence related to published papers is also welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信