Osama O Osman, Abdul-Rahman A El-Magzoub, Sarra Elamin
{"title":"Prevalence and Risk Factors of Central Venous Stenosis among Prevalent Hemodialysis Patients, a Single Center Experience.","authors":"Osama O Osman, Abdul-Rahman A El-Magzoub, Sarra Elamin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Central vein stenosis (CVS) is a common complication of central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. In this study we evaluated the prevalence and risk factors of CVS among hemodialysis (HD) patients in a single center in Sudan, using Doppler ultrasound as a screening tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 106 prevalent HD patients. For every patient, we performed Duplex Doppler for the right and left jugular, subclavian and femoral veins. A patient was considered to have hemodynamically significant stenosis if the pre-stenosis to the post-stenosis velocities ratio was ≥ 2.5 or they had complete vein occlusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 28.3% of patients had Doppler detected CVS, including 25.5% with hemodynamically significant stenosis and 2.8% with compromised flow. The prevalence of CVS was 68.4% among symptomatic patients compared to 19.5% in asymptomatic patients. The prevalence of CVS among patients with history of 0-1, 2-3 and ≥ 4 central venous catheters was 3.4%, 29.4% and 53.8% respectively (p=0.00). CVS was not more common in patients with history of previous/current jugular or femoral vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in these veins (28.3% vs 28.6% and 35% vs 26.7% respectively; p >0.1). However, CVS was significantly more common in patients with previous/ current subclavian vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in this vein (47.8% vs 22.9%, p = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CVS is highly prevalent among studied HD patients, particularly in the presence of suggestive clinical signs. The number of HD catheter placements and subclavian vein utilization for dialysis access impose a significantly higher risk of CVS.</p>","PeriodicalId":89079,"journal":{"name":"Arab journal of nephrology and transplantation","volume":"7 1","pages":"45-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arab journal of nephrology and transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Central vein stenosis (CVS) is a common complication of central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. In this study we evaluated the prevalence and risk factors of CVS among hemodialysis (HD) patients in a single center in Sudan, using Doppler ultrasound as a screening tool.
Methods: The study included 106 prevalent HD patients. For every patient, we performed Duplex Doppler for the right and left jugular, subclavian and femoral veins. A patient was considered to have hemodynamically significant stenosis if the pre-stenosis to the post-stenosis velocities ratio was ≥ 2.5 or they had complete vein occlusion.
Results: Overall, 28.3% of patients had Doppler detected CVS, including 25.5% with hemodynamically significant stenosis and 2.8% with compromised flow. The prevalence of CVS was 68.4% among symptomatic patients compared to 19.5% in asymptomatic patients. The prevalence of CVS among patients with history of 0-1, 2-3 and ≥ 4 central venous catheters was 3.4%, 29.4% and 53.8% respectively (p=0.00). CVS was not more common in patients with history of previous/current jugular or femoral vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in these veins (28.3% vs 28.6% and 35% vs 26.7% respectively; p >0.1). However, CVS was significantly more common in patients with previous/ current subclavian vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in this vein (47.8% vs 22.9%, p = 0.02).
Conclusion: CVS is highly prevalent among studied HD patients, particularly in the presence of suggestive clinical signs. The number of HD catheter placements and subclavian vein utilization for dialysis access impose a significantly higher risk of CVS.