Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
1995
DOI: 10.1159/000188461
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long-Term Survival of Vascular Accesses in a Large Chronic Hemodialysis Population

Abstract: Complications associated with vascular accesses account for approximately 30% of hospital admissions for chronic hemodialysis patients. Long-term patency of access was evaluated in 76 patients, without diabetes mellitus, who had been on dialysis for at least 3 years and 41 patients, with diabetes mellitus, who had been on dialysis for over 2 years. Fistulas functioned longer than grafts (58 vs. 22 months, p < 0.01, in nondiabetics and 70 vs 22 months, p < 0.01, in patients with diabetes). Declotting or revisio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
43
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
(6 reference statements)
2
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2 The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is still considered the best access for hemodialysis (HD) because of low complication rate, superior access survival, and decreased mortality when compared with either arteriovenous grafts or central venous dialysis catheters. [3][4][5][6][7] Because AVF requires fewer angiographic procedures and revisions, use of an AVF can also reduce the cost of vascular access-related care up to fivefold, 8,9 and multiple sources suggest that use of an AVF is cost-effective when compared with other vascular accesses. 10,11 Ideally, the AVF is placed and ready to use at the initiation of HD, but this process is highly dependent on predialysis nephrology care.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 The arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is still considered the best access for hemodialysis (HD) because of low complication rate, superior access survival, and decreased mortality when compared with either arteriovenous grafts or central venous dialysis catheters. [3][4][5][6][7] Because AVF requires fewer angiographic procedures and revisions, use of an AVF can also reduce the cost of vascular access-related care up to fivefold, 8,9 and multiple sources suggest that use of an AVF is cost-effective when compared with other vascular accesses. 10,11 Ideally, the AVF is placed and ready to use at the initiation of HD, but this process is highly dependent on predialysis nephrology care.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Access complications account for 30% of hemodialysis patient hospital admissions (1), and it has been estimated that 14% of total Medicare end-stage renal disease (ESRD) expenditures relate to the treatment of complications of vascular access (2). Mechanical malfunction of access due to thrombosis accounts for much of this morbidity and resource utilization; prevention and treatment of thrombosis is consequently of major clinical and economic importance.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The stenosis rate in the early phase is found to be higher in fistulas performed at the snuff box level than with fistulas performed at either the wrist or more proximal levels. The rate of thrombosis formation varies between 4% and 18% per year (15)(16)(17)(18). The follow-up period was 4 months in our patients, and fistula failure due to thrombosis developed in ten (27.7%) of our patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…Arteriovenous fistula is functional in 73-93% of patients after the first AV fistula operation (15)(16)(17)(18). The complication rate is 20% (10% wound, 8% ischemia) in patients undergoing AV fistula operation, since 24% of these patients need repeated intervention (3,19).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%