Roberto Minici, Massimo Venturini, Federico Fontana, Giuseppe Guzzardi, Federico Torre, Marco Spinetta, Andrea Coppola, Filippo Piacentino, Pasquale Guerriero, Nicola De Rosi, Biagio Apollonio, Marco Franchin, Francesco Giurazza, Luca Brunese, Domenico Laganà
{"title":"血管内治疗功能不全的透析瘘管:一项多中心回顾性分析,比较经桡动脉和常规经静脉通路。","authors":"Roberto Minici, Massimo Venturini, Federico Fontana, Giuseppe Guzzardi, Federico Torre, Marco Spinetta, Andrea Coppola, Filippo Piacentino, Pasquale Guerriero, Nicola De Rosi, Biagio Apollonio, Marco Franchin, Francesco Giurazza, Luca Brunese, Domenico Laganà","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endovascular Treatment of Malfunctioning Dialysis Fistulas: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Comparing Transradial and Conventional Transvenous Access.\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Minici, Massimo Venturini, Federico Fontana, Giuseppe Guzzardi, Federico Torre, Marco Spinetta, Andrea Coppola, Filippo Piacentino, Pasquale Guerriero, Nicola De Rosi, Biagio Apollonio, Marco Franchin, Francesco Giurazza, Luca Brunese, Domenico Laganà\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ccd.31349\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31349\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31349","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Endovascular Treatment of Malfunctioning Dialysis Fistulas: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Comparing Transradial and Conventional Transvenous Access.
Background: Venous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.
Methods: A retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.
Results: Of 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.
Conclusions: This study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.
期刊介绍:
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.