Percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation with the 4F WavelinQ EndoAVF System

Ouriel, Kenneth; Bala, Saravanan; Benck, Urs; Berland, Todd; Brunkwall, Jan; Chan, Tze Yuan; Clement, Jason; Dellanna, Frank; Ebner, Adrián; Gilbert, James; Griffin, Joseph; Haage, Patrick; Inston, Nicholas; Kiaii, Mercedeh; Kreienberg, Paul B.; Lichtenberg, Michael; Peden, Eric K.; Scheinert, Dierk; Schmitz‐Rixen, Thomas; Rosenkranz, Alexander R.; Schwindt, Arne; Tavakoli, A.; Tordoir, Jan H.M.; Wadoodi, Ashar; Weiss, Norbert; Westin, Gregory G.

doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2021.09.025

Cited by 23 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Berland et al recently published aggregated results from three different studies regarding the current 4Fr generation of the WavelinQ system [ 22 ]. A total of 120 patients were included, with a technical success rate of 96.7%.…”

Section: Results Of Clinical Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation—Review of Current Experience

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functioning vascular access is an essential element for life-saving hemodialysis therapy. A surgically-created arteriovenous fistula has been considered the best option for many years. Recently, two manufacturers developed systems for percutaneous/endovascular creation of an arteriovenous fistula (WavelinQ and Ellipsys). We provide a review of the available experience with these systems and discuss advantages and disadvantages.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Clinical Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation—Review of Current Experience

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The procedure success rate was 98.00% for endoAVF (95% CI, 0.97–0.99; I 2 = 16.25%; Figure 2 ) ( 8 – 17 , 19 – 21 ). There was no statistically significant difference between endovascular and surgical creation of AVF in the procedural success (OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.04, 11.98; P = 0.80; I 2 = 53%; Figure 3A ) ( 22 , 24 , 25 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Procedure-related complications for endoAVF showed 7% (95% CI, 0.04–0.17; I 2 = 78.31%; Supplementary Figure 1 ) ( 8 – 17 , 19 – 21 ), and there was no significant difference between the endovascular and surgical AVF (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 0.37–9.16; P = 0.45; I 2 = 59%; Supplementary Figure 2A ) ( 23 – 26 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Sun

Liu²,

Shen³

et al. 2022

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveCurrently, percutaneous endovascular creation of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) shows excellent outcomes. However, few systematic research evidence to support clinical decision making on the benefit of endovascular AVF is available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endovascular AVF (endoAVF) in patients with renal failure.MethodsWe searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for studies on endovascular or endovascular versus surgery for the creation of AVF. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by Review Manager 5.4 software (Revman, The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom) and Stata 15.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, United States).ResultsA total of 14 case series and 5 cohort studies, with 1,929 patients, were included in this study. The technique success was 98.00% for endoAVF (95% CI, 0.97–0.99; I2 = 16.25%). There was no statistically significant difference in 3 cohort studies between endovascular and surgical AVF for procedural success (OR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.04–11.98; P = 0.80; I2 = 53%). The maturation rates of endoAVF were 87.00% (95% CI, 0.79–0.93; I2 = 83.96%), and no significant difference was observed in 3 cohort studies between the 2 groups (OR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.20–2.63; P = 0.63; I2 = 88%). Procedure-related complications for endoAVF was 7% (95% CI, 0.04–0.17; I2 = 78.31%), and it did not show significant difference in 4 cohort studies between the 2 groups (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 0.37–9.16; P = 0.45; I2 = 59%).ConclusionThe endovascular creation of AVF is potentially effective and safe. These important data may provide evidence to support clinicians and patients in making decisions with endovascular AVF. But further research is great necessary due to lack of randomized controlled studies.

show abstract

“…The average time to maturity was 41 +/-17 days, and the average time to successful cannulation was 68+/-51 days. This new device allows percutaneous fistula creation between the radial artery and radial vein, or the ulnar artery and ulnar vein, making it a useful alternative to distal surgical AVF (30). Kitrou et al (31) performed 30 consecutive endovascular AVF creation procedures with an excellent follow up of more than 500 days.…”

Section: Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistulamentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolving panorama of vascular access in the 21st century

Neyra

Wazir²

2022

Front. Nephrol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are three major types of hemodialysis vascular access: hemodialysis catheters, arteriovenous grafts, and arteriovenous fistulas. Arteriovenous fistulas provide the best access due to their reliability and long-term patency. They are recommended by the current Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiatives (K-DOQI) guidelines; however, not all patients benefit from arteriovenous fistulas due to poor maturation or a lack of adequate vasculature. Currently, hemodialysis is initiated via catheters in the majority of patients. Catheters are associated with high morbidity and mortality due to infection, lower quality of dialysis, and the development of central vein stenosis. The varied responses of patients to the different access types exemplify the need to choose the “right access for the right patient” based on scores that can predict death risk and progression of chronic kidney disease. Additionally, vascular access, often referred to as the “Achilles’ heel” of hemodialysis patients, represents a significant percentage of the Medicare budget that continues to increase yearly. The purpose of this paper is to review the current literature on the management of vascular access complications and infection treatment and prevention. The paper also explores emerging research regarding the devices and methods to improve access outcomes such as early cannulation arteriovenous grafts, endovascular arteriovenous fistula creation, and regenerative grafts with resorbable scaffolds, among others. The data were collected through literature searches via PubMed, Athens and web search engines.

show abstract

Percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation with the 4F WavelinQ EndoAVF System

Cited by 23 publications

References 30 publications

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation—Review of Current Experience

Endovascular Arteriovenous Fistula Creation—Review of Current Experience

Percutaneous endovascular arteriovenous fistula: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The evolving panorama of vascular access in the 21st century

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About