1998
DOI: 10.1053/ajkd.1998.v32.pm9708617
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reduction in arteriovenous graft impairment: Results of a vascular access surveillance protocol

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
50
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Each reported a substantial decrease (by 41 to 77%) in the rate of graft thrombosis during the monitoring/surveillance period, as compared with the historical control period. This reduction in graft thrombosis was observed for clinical monitoring (23,58,71), dialysis venous pressure measurements (67,76), and flow monitoring (11).…”
Section: Mechanical Interventions To Reduce Graft Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 61%
“…Each reported a substantial decrease (by 41 to 77%) in the rate of graft thrombosis during the monitoring/surveillance period, as compared with the historical control period. This reduction in graft thrombosis was observed for clinical monitoring (23,58,71), dialysis venous pressure measurements (67,76), and flow monitoring (11).…”
Section: Mechanical Interventions To Reduce Graft Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 61%
“…Cayco et al (6) reported a graft thrombosis rate of 0.30 events per graft-year using DVP. Allowing for an expected 1-yr event-free rate of 70%, 63 subjects per group were required to detect a hazard ratio of 0.4 with 80% power and a two-sided ␣ of 0.05.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of studies have evaluated the positive predictive value of an abnormality of clinical AVG monitoring or surveillance for the presence of hemodynamically significant stenosis. The values were 69%-93% for clinical monitoring (80% for physical examination, 69% for unexplained decrease in Kt/V, and 66% for difficulties encountered during the dialysis session) (3,5,(8)(9)(10), 92% for static dialysis venous pressure (6), 87%-100% for flow monitoring (11,12), and 80% for duplex ultrasound (5).…”
Section: Can One Identify Avgs With Significant Stenosis By Noninvasimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such an approach makes sense intuitively. In fact, numerous observational studies have reported that implementation of routine AVG stenosis surveillance, in conjunction with preemptive angioplasty, markedly lowers the frequency of AVG thrombosis in comparison with a historical period without AVG surveillance (6,9,10,(15)(16)(17). More recently, six randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have evaluated this research question (4,5,12,(18)(19)(20) (Figure 2).…”
Section: Does Stenosis Surveillance With Preemptive Angioplasty Prevementioning
confidence: 99%