Access Type-Specific Vascular Access Creation Timing in Incident Hemodialysis: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Jooyeon Yoon, Kyungjun Shon, Hayne Cho Park, Sua Lee, Young-Ki Lee, Hyungseok Lee, Eun Jung Kim, Hoon Suk Park, Min-Ho Kim, Do Hyoung Kim
{"title":"Access Type-Specific Vascular Access Creation Timing in Incident Hemodialysis: A Nationwide Cohort Study.","authors":"Jooyeon Yoon, Kyungjun Shon, Hayne Cho Park, Sua Lee, Young-Ki Lee, Hyungseok Lee, Eun Jung Kim, Hoon Suk Park, Min-Ho Kim, Do Hyoung Kim","doi":"10.1159/000553533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The lead time needed for vascular access (VA) creation before hemodialysis (HD) initiation remains unclear. Because arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) differ in expected time to cannulation, the association between VA timing and outcomes may differ by access type.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we identified incident HD patients in 2013 who underwent AVF or AVG creation before HD initiation. Patients were classified according to the interval from VA creation to HD initiation: VA0 (<1 month), VA1 (1 to <3 months), VA3 (3 to <6 months), VA6 (6 to <9 months, reference), VA9 (9 to <12 months), and VA12 (12 to ≤24 months). Catheter use, patency loss, and mortality were analyzed separately in AVF and AVG patients using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 24,713 patients, 20,894 underwent AVF and 3,819 underwent AVG creation. In AVF patients, compared with VA6, VA0, and VA1 were associated with higher catheter use (odds ratios, 14.03 and 1.85), primary patency loss (hazard ratios [HRs], 2.64 and 1.16), secondary patency loss (HRs, 4.56 and 1.12), and mortality (HRs, 1.67 and 1.25). In AVG patients, adverse associations were mainly observed in VA0, including higher catheter use (odds ratio, 8.45), primary patency loss (HR, 1.97), secondary patency loss (HR, 2.06), and mortality (HR, 1.43). Primary patency loss was also higher in VA1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The association between VA creation timing and outcomes differed between AVF and AVG. For AVF, creation at least 3 months before HD initiation was associated with more favorable outcomes. For AVG, adverse associations for most outcomes were concentrated within 1 month before HD initiation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7570,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000553533","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The lead time needed for vascular access (VA) creation before hemodialysis (HD) initiation remains unclear. Because arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) differ in expected time to cannulation, the association between VA timing and outcomes may differ by access type.

Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we identified incident HD patients in 2013 who underwent AVF or AVG creation before HD initiation. Patients were classified according to the interval from VA creation to HD initiation: VA0 (<1 month), VA1 (1 to <3 months), VA3 (3 to <6 months), VA6 (6 to <9 months, reference), VA9 (9 to <12 months), and VA12 (12 to ≤24 months). Catheter use, patency loss, and mortality were analyzed separately in AVF and AVG patients using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox models.

Results: Among 24,713 patients, 20,894 underwent AVF and 3,819 underwent AVG creation. In AVF patients, compared with VA6, VA0, and VA1 were associated with higher catheter use (odds ratios, 14.03 and 1.85), primary patency loss (hazard ratios [HRs], 2.64 and 1.16), secondary patency loss (HRs, 4.56 and 1.12), and mortality (HRs, 1.67 and 1.25). In AVG patients, adverse associations were mainly observed in VA0, including higher catheter use (odds ratio, 8.45), primary patency loss (HR, 1.97), secondary patency loss (HR, 2.06), and mortality (HR, 1.43). Primary patency loss was also higher in VA1.

Conclusion: The association between VA creation timing and outcomes differed between AVF and AVG. For AVF, creation at least 3 months before HD initiation was associated with more favorable outcomes. For AVG, adverse associations for most outcomes were concentrated within 1 month before HD initiation.

突发血液透析中通路类型特异性血管通路创建时间:一项全国性队列研究。
导读:血液透析(HD)开始前血管通路(VA)创建所需的前置时间尚不清楚。由于动静脉瘘(AVFs)和动静脉移植物(AVGs)的预期插管时间不同,因此血管移植时间和结果之间的关系可能因通道类型而异。方法:使用韩国国民健康保险服务数据库,我们确定了2013年在HD发病前进行AVF或AVG创建的事件HD患者。根据VA产生至HD发生的间隔时间:VA0对患者进行分类(结果:24,713例患者中,20,894例患者行AVF, 3,819例患者行AVG。在AVF患者中,与VA6相比,VA0和VA1与更高的导管使用率(优势比,14.03和1.85)、原发性通畅丧失(风险比[hr], 2.64和1.16)、继发性通畅丧失(风险比,4.56和1.12)和死亡率(风险比,1.67和1.25)相关。在AVG患者中,不良反应主要见于VA0,包括较高的导管使用率(优势比为8.45)、原发性通畅丧失(优势比为1.97)、继发性通畅丧失(优势比为2.06)和死亡率(优势比为1.43)。原发性通畅丧失在VA1中也较高。结论:AVF和AVG的VA形成时间与预后的关系不同,对于AVF,在HD开始前至少3个月的VA形成与更有利的结果相关。对于AVG,大多数结果的不良关联集中在HD开始前1个月内。
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
American Journal of Nephrology
American Journal of Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
74
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The ''American Journal of Nephrology'' is a peer-reviewed journal that focuses on timely topics in both basic science and clinical research. Papers are divided into several sections, including:
×
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
小红书