Objectives: We aim to investigate the results of stenting for central venous occlusions and stenoses in the hemodialysis patients. Methods: Twenty-nine cases treated with endovascular recanalization with deployment of bare metal stent (BMS) for central venous occlusions (24 cases) and recurrent stenoses (5 cases) between 2014 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results of these procedures including success rate, operative time, estimated blood loss, morbidity, primary patency, assisted primary patency and freedom from target-lesion revascularization (TLR) were evaluated. Results: Nine lesions were in brachiocephalic vein (Occlusion/Stenosis: 8/1) and 20 lesions were in subclavian vein (Occlusion/Stenosis: 16/4). Procedural success was 94% (29/31 cases) and operation time/estimated blood loss was 68±39 min/28±54 g. Symptom were relieved or disappeared in all successful cases. Morbidity (extravasation of contrast medium) was 3% (1/29). During the period of observation, 1 stent fracture with occlusion and 1 stent migration to periphery were recognized. 1-year primary patency, freedom from TLR, and assisted primary patency were 40% (median patent time: 256 days), 67% (median patent time: 524 days), and 77%, respectively. Conclusion: Stenting for central venous occlusions and stenoses in the hemodialysis patients is safe and durable treatment option. However, considering its off-label use and potential hazard including vessel rupture, stent migration, and stent fracture, the indication for BMS deployment should be conservative, and interventionist should be well acquainted with prevention and measures to these complications. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2019; 28: 193-198.).
Objectives: We aim to investigate the results of stenting for central venous occlusions and stenoses in the hemodialysis patients. Methods: Twenty-nine cases treated with endovascular recanalization with deployment of bare metal stent (BMS) for central venous occlusions (24 cases) and recurrent stenoses (5 cases) between 2014 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results of these procedures including success rate, operative time, estimated blood loss, morbidity, primary patency, assisted primary patency and freedom from target-lesion revascularization (TLR) were evaluated. Results: Nine lesions were in brachiocephalic vein (Occlusion/Stenosis: 8/1) and 20 lesions were in subclavian vein (Occlusion/Stenosis: 16/4). Procedural success was 94% (29/31 cases) and operation time/estimated blood loss was 68±39 min/28±54 g. Symptom were relieved or disappeared in all successful cases. Morbidity (extravasation of contrast medium) was 3% (1/29). During the period of observation, 1 stent fracture with occlusion and 1 stent migration to periphery were recognized. 1-year primary patency, freedom from TLR, and assisted primary patency were 40% (median patent time: 256 days), 67% (median patent time: 524 days), and 77%, respectively. Conclusion: Stenting for central venous occlusions and stenoses in the hemodialysis patients is safe and durable treatment option. However, considering its off-label use and potential hazard including vessel rupture, stent migration, and stent fracture, the indication for BMS deployment should be conservative, and interventionist should be well acquainted with prevention and measures to these complications. (This is a translation of Jpn J Vasc Surg 2019; 28: 193-198.).
Authors: J D Taylor; E D Lehmann; A-M Belli; A A Nicholson; D Kessel; I R Robertson; J G Pollock; R A Morgan Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2007 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: D S Bhatia; S R Money; J L Ochsner; D E Crockett; D Chatman; S A Dharamsey; R F Mulingtapang; D Shaw; S R Ramee Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: James Ronald; Bradley Davis; Carlos J Guevara; Waleska M Pabon-Ramos; Tony P Smith; Charles Y Kim Journal: J Vasc Access Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 2.283
Authors: Andrew M Bakken; Clinton D Protack; Wael E Saad; David E Lee; David L Waldman; Mark G Davies Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.268