Brachiobasilic fistulae: an upper limb autologous option for everyone?

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: Autologous arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) are the vascular access option of choice. However, Brachiobasilic fistula (BBF) are complex procedures with variable outcomes reported in the literature. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes and morbidity associated with BBF in our population. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was undertaken for all 51 BBF created in our institution between January 2010 and March 2013. These were compared to an age and sex-matched group of brachiocephalic fistula (BCF) created over a similar time period. Demographic, operative and outcome data was collected for all patients. The primary end points were primary functional patency, primary-assisted patency and secondary patency at 3, 6 and 12 months. Continuous data was compared using Student's t-test and categorical data using chi-squared test (p < 0.05 is significant). RESULTS: Mean patient age was 57 years (range: 21-82). About 45% were male. About 73% of patients were already on hemodialysis (HD) at the time of BBF creation. BBF was the secondary or tertiary access procedure in 60.8% of patients (n = 31). BBF were associated with significant operative burden with 82% of patients requiring a general anaesthetic and median hospital admission of 2 days (range: 1-4). About 75% had a single-stage procedure. About 23.5% (n = 12) required operative revision (superficialization or anastomotic revision for stenosis). Patients with BBF spent an additional 3.45 days/year in hospital as a result of access related complications compared to 0.56 days/year in the BCF group. Primary-assisted patency at 3, 6 and 12 months was better in the BCF group than BBF group (86%, 72% and 48% vs. 71%, 59%, 33%, respectively; p < 0.01) Primary functional and secondary patency rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were 74%, 58% and 32% and 78%, 63% and 41%, respectively, with an average of 0.33 procedures per AVF to maintain patency (10 fistuloplasties, 4 IR thrombectomy and 3 surgical thrombectomy). About 32% (n = 17) of BBF were never used for HD (seven patients had a patent AVF but did not require HD >18 months following creation; nine failed to adequately mature and one patient refused second stage superficialization). CONCLUSIONS: BBF are associated with a significant initial operative burden and higher complication and poorer patency rates than BCF. About one-third of BBF created in this series were never used. Given the morbidity associated with this procedure, careful consideration should be given to creation of BBF in pre-dialysis patients particularly those in whom the rate of decline in renal function is slow.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.