Keywords: Vascular access, Hemodialysis, Percutaneous, Stenosis.
|How to cite this article:|
van der Linden J, van den Dorpel MA. Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty of Failing Hemodialysis Grafts and Fistulae. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl 2004;15:333-7
|How to cite this URL:|
van der Linden J, van den Dorpel MA. Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty of Failing Hemodialysis Grafts and Fistulae. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl [serial online] 2004 [cited 2020 Dec 6];15:333-7. Available from: https://www.sjkdt.org/text.asp?2004/15/3/333/32982
| Introduction|| |
Vascular access complications represent an ongoing contributor to patients' morbidity and even mortality. , In the United States, access complications cost close to $1 billion a year, and are responsible for 17-30% of all hospitalizations in dialysis patients. ,, Thrombosis is the leading cause among vascular access complications. It is almost always associated with the presence of stenosis, which is often located at, or close to, the venous anastomosis. Nowadays, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is considered a safe and effective treatment of stenotic lesions.  Routine surveillance programs for the early detection of stenoses are advocated by both American and European DOQI guidelines. If these are put into practice and combined with elective angioplasty, they have been shown to substantially reduce the number of thromboses per patient year. ,,, Also, the use of catheters, the duration of hospitalization, the number of missed dialysis treatments and even the total cost of treatment of thrombosis-related events for grafts can be substantially reduced by aggressive access surveillance. 
Based on the vast experience reported in the literature, the NKF-K/DOQI taskforce has suggested PTA as one of the preferred treatments for vascular access stenosis.  Compared with surgery, PTA has several advantages. PTA is an outpatient procedure, which preserves access sites and guarantees use of the access for dialysis immediately after the treatment. Also, even centrally located stenoses are accessible with PTA. This review will highlight the angioplastic findings and possibilities and reviews the results and complications of this technique.
| Localization of Stenoses|| |
In arterio-venous grafts (AVG), most thrombotic events result from one or more progressive stenoses in the venous outflow tract, typically at the venous anastomosis.,,, These stenoses are caused by intimal and fibromuscular hyperplasia, which may be induced by turbulent flow, increased shear stress and other factors. , Any obstruction of the outflow from the graft will result in an increase in venous pressure in the dialysis circuit with an accompanying decrease in blood flow.  Stenoses in arterio-venous fistula (AVF) tend to occur more centrally at vein bifurcations and venous valves, rather than close to the venous outlet. Stenoses in AVF frequently result in development of collateral veins draining the AVF. As a result, a venous stenosis will cause a reduction in blood flow but often without the increase in venous pressure. Arterial inflow stenoses account for less than five percent of lesions in accesses.  According to NKF-K/DOQI guidelines, stenotic lesions of 50% or more, associated with clinical or physiological abnormalities, should be treated. 
| Evaluation of the Effect of PTA|| |
K/DOQI recommends a residual stenosis of less than 30% after PTA. However, several studies have shown that the angiographic result of PTA is poorly related to its subsequent patency. ,,,, We found that the access flow prior to PTA, and the initial improvement in access flow after PTA were strong predictors of the decline in access flow after PTA.  Furthermore, the likelihood of access thrombosis is about 80% if angioplasty fails to improve access flow by at least 20%.  Recently, the SCVIR Technology Assessment Committee recommended that PTA success should be expressed in both angiographic and functional parameters.  A successful PTA procedure should lead to an increase in access flow of 250-300 mL/min. ,, The percentage of PTA procedures resulting in an access flow less than the threshold value of 600 mL/min, was 34% in AVG and 50% in AVF. Schwab et al defined failure of PTA as an increase in access flow of less than 20%, which occurred in 21% of grafts.  This lack of effect in a minority of patients may be caused by rapid recoil of the stenotic lesion, occurring in the period between PTA and the first access flow measurement. Intravascular ultrasound after PTA showed that immediate elastic recoil occurred in 50% of the stenotic lesions.  Access flow measurements, during or immediately after PTA, made in the intervention room, could be helpful to optimize procedure results.
| Patency Rates of PTA|| |
Numerous reports have demonstrated that PTA effectively improves access function. However, comparing patency rates is difficult because of differences in patient selection, access types and definitions of efficiency of the PTA procedure. Initial success rates of PTA, i.e. post-PTA rest-stenosis less than 30%, range from 80 to 94%. ,,, The highest rate of technical failure is associated with central lesions.  Primary patency rates at six months after PTA range from 43 to 77%, again with poorest long-term success in central lesions (ranging from nearly 25% to 42% at 6 months). ,,,,,
Only one controlled surveillance study evaluated PTA results in AVF.  With a sixmonth patency of more than 95%, PTA seems to be more successful in AVF than in AVG. Also, the mean time interval to re-PTA is longer for AVF than AVG (169 vs. 109 days), indicating a slower development of re-stenosis in AVF.  Recently, Beathard et al reported on the beneficial effect of PTA in AVF that failed to mature.  Angioplasty was performed to treat venous and arterial stenoses with a success rate of nearly 100%. In the great majority of AVF, hemodialysis could be initiated. The long-term effect of these early angioplastic corrections on AVF maturation still needs to be elucidated.
Results of PTA after vascular access thrombosis are generally worse, with a reported six-month patency rate of only 19% in one study including AVG only.  This finding suggests that the outcome of PTA of less severe stenoses is superior to the outcome of PTA of more severe stenoses that lead to thrombosis, emphasizing the importance of effective surveillance of access stenosis and pre-emptive PTA. Primary patency after surgical thrombectomy seems slightly better, but remains disappointing. ,, Dougherty et al stressed the fact that endovascular treatment is more expensive because of frequent secondary surgery after technical failure.  However, it is important to keep in mind that surgical thrombectomy is followed by reconstruction of the anastomosis in most cases. As a consequence, after several surgical revisions a new anastomosis often can no longer be created. Of course, the creation of a new access also results in extra costs and morbidity.
PTA results in substantial vascular injury, which may trigger development of restenosis. However, several authors found similar success rates after first, second or third PTA. , Still, the use of cutting balloons instead of circular dilatation balloons resulted in less intimal proliferation in an animal model, indicating less traumatic injury after cutting balloon angioplasty.  Uncontrolled data in hemodialysis patients indicate that this device may be useful in clinical practice  ,although no randomized studies comparing both balloon types in access stenosis have been published so far.
| Complications of PTA|| |
With a clinically significant morbidity rate of less than five percent, PTA can be considered a safe procedure. The most common complications are vein rupture at the angioplasty site, acute access thrombosis and pseudoaneurysm formation. If possible, self expanding stents are used to treat vein ruptures, otherwise surgical intervention is needed. Other reported complications include puncture site bleeding, bacteremia and allergic reactions to contrast medium.
| Use of Self-Expanding Stents|| |
The majority of trials reporting optimistic results of using self-expanding stents to treat venous stenoses are uncontrolled or retrospective. In a prospective randomized controlled trial, 87 patients with significant stenotic lesions were randomized to treatment with PTA or PTA and stent placement.  The sixmonth primary patency rate of peripheral venous stenoses was 31% in the PTA group and 27% in the PTA and stent group. Also, stent placement in central venous stenoses did not result in better patency rates. However, the number of central venous lesions was small in this study.  Another prospective randomized trial was conducted by Beathard et al.  Again, no benefit could be demonstrated of the use of a stent as an adjunct to PTA for anastomotic lesions in AVG.  Overall, additive placement of self-expanding stents should be considered only in a selected group of patients, with central-elastic-lesions not responsive to PTA, or recurrence within three months after successful PTA, and patients with vein rupture after PTA. Lesions that cannot be dilated with angioplasty should not be treated with stent placement. 
| Conclusions|| |
PTA is an effective and safe outpatient procedure in the treatment of hemodialysis access stenoses, and it can be repeated several times. When access thrombosis has occurred, surgical thrombectomy seems to have slightly better results. However, radiological thrombolysis has the advantage of angiographic imaging afterwards and immediate treatment of the underlying stenosis by angioplasty. Also, in contrast with surgical thrombectomy, the radiological approach makes revision of the anastomosis unnecessary, thereby preserving the access. Besides further fine-tuning of vascular access surveillance strategies, future studies should also be aimed at the further development of less traumatic angioplasty techniques, like cutting balloons. Foremost, the use of pharmacological inhibition of stenosis formation and recurrence after PTA, for instance with local drug delivery systems or gene therapy should be vigorously explored.
| References|| |
|1.||Powe NR, Jaar B, Furth SL, Hermann J, Briggs W. Septicaemia in dialysis patients: incidence, risk factors and prognosis. Kidney Int 1999;55:1081-90. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|2.||Schwab SJ, Beathard G. The hemodialysis catheter conundrum: hate living with them, but can't live without them. Kidney Int 1999;56:1-17. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|3.||U.S. Renal Data System. The economic cost of ESRD, vascular access procedures, and Medicare spending for alternative modalities of treatment. Am J Kidney Dis 1997;30 (Suppl.1):S160-S177. |
|4.||Feldman HI, Kobrin S, Wasserstein A. Hemodialysis vascular access morbidity. J Am Soc Nephrol 1996;7:523-35. [PUBMED] |
|5.||Chazan JA, London MR, Pono L. The impact of diagnosis-related groups on the cost of hospitalisation for end-stage renal disease patients at Rhode Island Hospital from 1987 to 1990. Am J Kidney Dis 1992; 19:523-5. [PUBMED] |
|6.||III NKF-K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for vascular access update 2000. Am J Kidney Dis 2001;37 (Suppl 1):S137-81. |
|7.||Schwab SJ, Raymond JR, Saeed M, Newman GE, Dennis PA, Bollinger RR. Prevention of hemodialysis fistula thrombosis. Early detection of venous stenoses. Kidney Int 1989;36:707-11. |
|8.||Besarab A, Sullivan KL, Ross RP, Moritz MJ. Utility of intra-access pressure monitoring in detecting and correcting venous outlet stenoses prior to thrombosis. Kidney Int 1995;47:1364-73. [PUBMED] |
|9.||Safa AA, Valji K, Roberts AC, Ziegler TW, Hye RJ, Oglevie SB. Detection and treatment of dysfunctional hemodialysis access grafts: effect of a surveillance program on graft patency and the incidence of thrombosis. Radiology 1996;199:653-7. [PUBMED] |
|10.||Smits JH, van der Linden J, Hagen EC, et al. Graft surveillance: venous pressure, access flow, or the combination? Kidney Int 2001; 59:1551-8. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|11.||McCarley P, Wingard RL, Shyr Y, Pettus W, Hakim RM, Ikizler TA. Vascular access blood flow monitoring reduces access morbidity and costs. Kidney Int 2001;60:1164-72. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|12.||Kanterman RY, Vesely TM, Pilgram TK, Guy BW, Windus DW, Picus D. Dialysis access grafts: anatomic location of venous stenosis and results of angioplasty. Radiology 1995;195:135-9. [PUBMED] |
|13.||Roberts AB, Kahn MB, Bradford S, et al. Graft surveillance and angioplasty prolongs dialysis graft patency. J Am Coll Surg 1996;183:486-92. [PUBMED] |
|14.||Beathard GA. Thrombolysis versus surgery for the treatment of thrombosed dialysis access grafts. J Am Soc Nephrol 1995; 6:1619-24. [PUBMED] |
|15.||Swedberg SH, Brown BG, Sigley R, Wight TN, Gordon D, Nicholls SC. Intimal fibromuscular hyperplasia at the venous anastomosis of PTFE grafts in hemodialysis patients. Clinical, immunocytochemical, light and electron microscopic assessment. Circulation 1989;80:1726-36. |
|16.||Hofstra L. Intimal hyperplasia in human vascular grafts. A study in peripheral bypasses and arteriovenous fistulas. Thesis Rijksuniversiteit Limburg Maastricht 1995, ISBN 90-5278-190-7. |
|17.||Sullivan KL, Besarab A, Bonn J, Shapiro MJ, Gardiner GA Jr, Moritz MJ. Hemodynamics of failing dialysis grafts. Radiology 1993; 186:867-72. |
|18.||Beathard GA. Percutaneous transvenous angioplasty in the treatment of vascular access stenosis. Kidney Int 1992;42:1390-7. [PUBMED] |
|19.||Lumsden AB, MacDonald MJ, Kikeri D, Cotsonis GA, Harker LA, Martin LG. Prophylactic balloon angioplasty fails to prolong the patency of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene arteriovenous grafts: results of a prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg 1997;26:382-90. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|20.||Martin LG, MacDonald MJ, Kikeri D, Cotsonis GA, Harker LA, Lumsden AB. Prophylactic angioplasty reduces thrombosis in virgin ePTFE arteriovenous dialysis grafts with greater than 50% stenosis: subset analysis of a prospectively randomized study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1999;10:389-96. |
|21.||Ahya SN, Windus DW, Vesely TM, Lattimore BA. Utility of radiologic criteria for predicting access flow after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [Abstract]. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999;10 (ASN Program and Abstracts): 200A. |
|22.||Van der Linden J, Smits JH, Assink JH, et al. Short- and long-term functional effects of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in hemodialysis vascular access. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002;13:715-20. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|23.||Schwab SJ, Oliver MJ, Suhocki P, McCann R. Hemodialysis arteriovenous access: detection of stenosis and response to treatment by vascular access blood flow. Kidney Int 2001;59:358-62. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|24.||Gray RJ, Sacks D, Martin LG, Trerotola SO. Reporting standards for percutaneous interventions in dialysis access. Technology Assessment Committee. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1999;10:1405-15. |
|25.||Tessitore N, Mansueto G, Bedogna V, et al. A prospective controlled trial on effect of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty on functioning arteriovenous fistulae survival. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003;14:1623-7. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|26.||Davidson CJ, Newman GE, Sheikh KH, Kisslo K, Stack RS, Schwab SJ. Mechanisms of angioplasty in hemodialysis fistula stenoses evaluated by intravascular ultrasound. Kidney Int 1991;40:91-5. [PUBMED] |
|27.||Saeed M, Newman GE, McCann RL, Sussman SK, Braun SD, Dunnick ND. Stenoses in dialysis fistulas: treatment with percutanous angioplasty. Radiology 1987;164:693-7. |
|28.||Lay JP, Ashleigh RJ, Tranconi L, Ackrill P, Al-Khaffaf H. Result of angioplasty of BrescioCimino haemodialysis fistulae: medium-term follow-up. Clinical Radiology 1998;53:608-11. [PUBMED] |
|29.||Beathard GA, Arnold P, Jackson J, et al. Aggressive treatment of early fistula failure. Kidney Int 2003;64:1487-94. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|30.||Lilly RZ, Carlton D, Barker J, et al. Predictors of arteriovenous graft patency after radiologic intervention in hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 2001;37:945-53. [PUBMED] |
|31.||Marston WA, Criado E, Jaques PF, Mauro MA, Burnham SJ, Keagy BA. Prospective randomized comparison of surgical versus endovascular management of thrombosed dialysis access grafts. J Vasc Surg 1997; 26:373-80. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|32.||Dougherty MJ, Calligaro KD, Schindler N, Raviola CA, Ntoso A. Endovascular versus surgical treatment for thrombosed hemodialysis grafts: a prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg 1999;30:1016-23. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|33.||Vesely TM, Williams D, Weiss M, et al. Comparison of the angiojet rheolytic catheter to surgical thrombectomy for the treatment of thrombosed hemodialysis grafts. Peripheral AngioJet Clinical Trial. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1999;10:1195-205. |
|34.||Barath P, Fishbein MC, Vari S, Forrester JS. Cutting balloon: a novel approach to percutaneous angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 1991;68:1249-52. [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT]|
|35.||Vorwerk D, Adam G, Muller-Leisse C, Guenther RW. Hemodialysis fistulas and grafts: use of cutting balloons to dilate venous stenoses. Radiology 1996;201:864-7. |
|36.||Quinn SF, Schuman ES, Demlow TA, et al. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty versus endovascular stent placement in the treatment of venous stenoses in patients undergoing hemodialysis: intermediate results. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1995;6:851-5. [PUBMED] |
|37.||Beathard GA. Gianturco self-expanding stent in the treatment of stenosis in dialysis access grafts. Kidney Int 1993;43:872-7. [PUBMED] |
Joke van der Linden
Department of Internal Medicine, Rijnmond-Zuid Medical Center, Location Clara, Olympiaweg 350, 3078 HT, Rotterdam, The Netherlands