Association of four types of vascular access including arterial superficialization with mortality in maintenance hemodialysis patients: a nationwide cohort study in Japan

American Journal of Nephrology

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply

Start free trial

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details Abstract

Introduction: Vascular access usage varies widely across countries. Previous studies have evaluated the association of clinical outcomes with the three types of vascular access, namely arteriovenous fistula (AVF), arteriovenous graft (AVG), and tunneled and cuffed central venous catheter (TC-CVC). However, little is known regarding the association between arterial superficialization (AS) and the mortality of patients. Methods: A nationwide cohort study was conducted using data from the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy Renal Data Registry (2006–2007). We included patients aged ≥20 years undergoing hemodialysis with a dialysis vintage ≥6 months. The exposures of interest were the four types of vascular access: AVF, AVG, AS, and TC-CVC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the associations of vascular access types with 1-year all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Results: A total of 183,490 maintenance hemodialysis patients were included: 90.7% with AVF, 6.9% with AVG, 2.0% with AS, and 0.4% with TC-CVC. During the 1-year follow-up period, 13,798 patients died. Compared to patients with AVF, those with AVG, AS, and TC-CVC had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality after adjustment for confounding factors; adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals): 1.30 (1.20–1.41), 1.56 (1.39–1.76), and 2.15 (1.77–2.61), respectively. Similar results were obtained for infection-related and cardiovascular mortality. Conclusion: This nationwide cohort study conducted in Japan suggested that AVF usage may have the lowest risk of all-cause mortality. The study also suggested that the usage of AS may be associated with better survival rates compared to those of TC-CVC in patients who are not suitable for AVF or AVG.

S. Karger AG, Basel

Article / Publication Details Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

Comments (0)

No login
gif