BACKGROUND: Central venous stenosis and obstruction (CVD) is a serious and prevalent challenge to both resolve the venous hypertension symptoms and maintain the pantency of the ipsilateral hemodialysis access in hemodialysis patients. This study aimed to summarize our experience of the endovascular management of the central venous stenosis or obstruction in hemodialysis patients. METHODS: Twenty-four haemodialysis cases of central vein stenosis or obstruction with ipsilateral functional vascular access in our hospital between July 2006 and February 2012 were treated by interventional therapy and the data were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Eighteen males and six females with mean age of (66.4 ± 13.8) years and manifesting with arm swelling and venous hypertension were enrolled; 62.5% of them had a history of catheterization. Venography showed stenotic lesion in 10 cases including eight cases of brachiocephalic vein stenosis and two cases of subclavian vein stenosis and 14 cases of obstruction lesions including seven cases of short brachiocephalic obstruction and seven cases of long segment obstruction. Interventional therapy was performed and the technique success rate was 83.3%. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) was performed in nine cases and stent was performed in 11 cases firstly. The symptoms of venous hypertension were resolved after intervention in all the cases. There was no major complication and death perioperatively. During follow-up, reintervention was done, the primary patency rates were (88.9 ± 10.5)%, (64.8 ± 10.5)% and (48.6 ± 18.7)% at 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after treatment in the PTA group; (90.0 ± 9.5)% and (77.1 ± 14.4)% at 6 months and 1 year after treatment in the stent group, respectively. The secondary patency rates were (48.6 ± 18.7)% in the PTA group and (83.3 ± 15.2)% in the stent group 1 year after treatment, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (primary patency, P = 0.20; secondary patency, P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The endovascular intervention is a safe and effective method for CVD in short term; enhanced follow-up and repeated interventions are required to maintain patency for long term. The prevention is most important. Avoiding and minimizing the placement of the central venous catheter may be the key point for the prevention.
BACKGROUND:Central venous stenosis and obstruction (CVD) is a serious and prevalent challenge to both resolve the venous hypertension symptoms and maintain the pantency of the ipsilateral hemodialysis access in hemodialysis patients. This study aimed to summarize our experience of the endovascular management of the central venous stenosis or obstruction in hemodialysis patients. METHODS: Twenty-four haemodialysis cases of central vein stenosis or obstruction with ipsilateral functional vascular access in our hospital between July 2006 and February 2012 were treated by interventional therapy and the data were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Eighteen males and six females with mean age of (66.4 ± 13.8) years and manifesting with arm swelling and venous hypertension were enrolled; 62.5% of them had a history of catheterization. Venography showed stenotic lesion in 10 cases including eight cases of brachiocephalic vein stenosis and two cases of subclavian vein stenosis and 14 cases of obstruction lesions including seven cases of short brachiocephalic obstruction and seven cases of long segment obstruction. Interventional therapy was performed and the technique success rate was 83.3%. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) was performed in nine cases and stent was performed in 11 cases firstly. The symptoms of venous hypertension were resolved after intervention in all the cases. There was no major complication and death perioperatively. During follow-up, reintervention was done, the primary patency rates were (88.9 ± 10.5)%, (64.8 ± 10.5)% and (48.6 ± 18.7)% at 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after treatment in the PTA group; (90.0 ± 9.5)% and (77.1 ± 14.4)% at 6 months and 1 year after treatment in the stent group, respectively. The secondary patency rates were (48.6 ± 18.7)% in the PTA group and (83.3 ± 15.2)% in the stent group 1 year after treatment, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (primary patency, P = 0.20; secondary patency, P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The endovascular intervention is a safe and effective method for CVD in short term; enhanced follow-up and repeated interventions are required to maintain patency for long term. The prevention is most important. Avoiding and minimizing the placement of the central venous catheter may be the key point for the prevention.