Literature DB >> 33156388

Double Mesh Nitinol Stent Versus Self-expanding Stent-graft in Recurrent/Resistant Cephalic Vein Arch Stenoses in Dialysis Fistulae: A Comparative Study.

Shemin Abhay Mehta1, Usman Shaikh2, Tze Y Chan2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the double mesh nitinol stent (DNS) versus the self-expanding stent-graft (SES) in recurrent/resistant cephalic vein arch stenosis in dialysis fistulae.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 17 cases with recurrent/resistant stenosis of the cephalic vein arch treated with a DNS were compared retrospectively with 18 cases treated with an SES. Stenting was performed either for significant recoil post-angioplasty with high-pressure balloons or in recurrent stenoses. Patients were followed up with Doppler ultrasound in our vascular access surveillance programme. Primary and assisted primary patency rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
RESULTS: Both stents showed 100% technical success immediately post-stenting, defined as residual stenosis < 30%. 3, 6 and 12 month primary patency of the DNS was 82.4%, 69.7% and 28.1% versus 88.9%, 77.8% and 72.2% for the SES. The DNS had a mean primary patency of 242.4 days compared to 896.3 days for the SES (p = 0.021). 12 month assisted primary patency was 88.2% (DNS) and 100% (SES). The DNS had a mean assisted primary patency of 812 days compared to 1390.3 days for the SES, though this did not reach statistical significance. No stent fractures were identified at 2 years in either group.
CONCLUSION: Both stents had 100% technical success with no stent fractures. SES showed statistically significant higher primary patency. Assisted primary patency was also higher, though this did not reach statistical significance.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Angioplasty; Cephalic arch; Dialysis; Fistula; Stent

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33156388     DOI: 10.1007/s00270-020-02699-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol        ISSN: 0174-1551            Impact factor:   2.740


  5 in total

1.  Use of the Viabahn stent graft for the treatment of recurrent cephalic arch stenosis in hemodialysis accesses.

Authors:  Gregg A Miller; Dean C Preddie; Yevgeny Savransky; Lawrence M Spergel
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 4.268

2.  Angioplasty with stent graft versus bare stent for recurrent cephalic arch stenosis in autogenous arteriovenous access for hemodialysis: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  David Shemesh; Ilya Goldin; Ibrahim Zaghal; Daniel Berlowitz; David Raveh; Oded Olsha
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 4.268

3.  Role of surgical intervention for cephalic arch stenosis in the "fistula first" era.

Authors:  Kaveh Kian; Stephen W Unger; Rick Mishler; Donald Schon; Oliver Lenz; Arif Asif
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2007-11-22       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 4.  A Review of Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Hemodialysis Fistula.

Authors:  Ioannis Bountouris; Georgia Kritikou; Nikolaos Degermetzoglou; Konstantinos Ioannis Avgerinos
Journal:  Int J Vasc Med       Date:  2018-03-27

5.  Helical stent (SUPERA™) and drug-coated balloon (Passeo-18 Lux™) for recurrent cephalic arch stenosis: Rationale and design of arch V SUPERA-LUX Study.

Authors:  T Y Tang; C S Tan; Cjq Yap; R Y Tan; H H Tay; Etc Choke; T T Chong
Journal:  J Vasc Access       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.283

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.