Journal List > J Korean Soc Radiol > v.66(6) > 1087127

TOOLS
Yoon, Shin, Ahn, Park, Ohm, and Kim: Comparison of a Nitinol Stent versus Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of a Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Graft
Original Article
Interventional Radiology
Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology

Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology 2012; 66(6): 519-526.

Published online: 13 June 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.0000/jksr.2012.66.6.519

Comparison of a Nitinol Stent versus Balloon Angioplasty for Treatment of a Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Graft

Yeo Chang Yoon, MD1, Byung Seok Shin, MD1, Moonsang Ahn, MD2, Mi-Hyun Park, MD3, Joon Young Ohm, MD4, Ho Jun Kim, MD5

1Department of Radiology, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

2Department of Surgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

3Department of Radiology, Dankook University Hospital, Cheonan, Korea.

4Department of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, Bucheon, Korea.

5Department of Radiology, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

Corresponding author: Byung Seok Shin, MD. Department of Radiology, Chungnam National University Hospital, 282 Munhwa-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon 301-721, Korea. Tel. 82-42-280-7333, Fax. 82-42-253-0061, starzan@chol.com

Received 14 March 2012       Accepted 24 April 2012

Copyright © 2012 The Korean Society of Radiology

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to 1) evaluate the outcome of placing a nitinol stent for treating dysfunctional arteriovenous grafts (AVG), and 2) compare the results with those of successful balloon angioplasty.

Materials and Methods

Between February 2008 and October 2011, we retrospectively reviewed the interventional data and medical records of 29 patients (21 men, 8 women; mean age, 67.4 years) who underwent interventional procedures for dysfunctional AVG. Stents were placed only in cases with inadequate angioplasty results. Stent patency was evaluated and compared to cases of successful balloon angioplasty using the Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results

Eleven stents and 18 angioplasties were performed successfully at the venous anastomotic site of AVG. The primary patency at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months did not differ significantly for stent placement and angioplasty (52%, 29%, 15%, 15% vs. 71%, 50%, 34%, 34%; mean survival, 164 vs. 253 days, p = 0.283). Secondary patency of the stent also did not differ significantly from angioplasty (80%, 80%, 49%, 49% vs. 76%, 57%, 57%, 36%; mean survival, 405 vs. 385 days, p = 0.553).

Conclusion

Nitinol stent placement was effective for treating dysfunctional AVG, but did not improve the primary and secondary patency compared to successful angioplasty.

Keywords: Stents and Prostheses, Arteriovenous Grafts, Hemodialysis

References

1. Pisoni RL, Young EW, Dykstra DM, Greenwood RN, Hecking E, Gillespie B, et al. Vascular access use in Europe and the United States: results from the DOPPS. Kidney Int. 2002. 61:305–316.
2. White JJ, Bander SJ, Schwab SJ, Churchill DN, Moist LM, Beathard GA, et al. Is percutaneous transluminal angioplasty an effective intervention for arteriovenous graft stenosis? Semin Dial. 2005. 18:190–202.
3. Vascular Access 2006 Work Group. Clinical practice guidelines for vascular access. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006. 48:Suppl 1. S176–S247.
4. Haruguchi H, Teraoka S. Intimal hyperplasia and hemodynamic factors in arterial bypass and arteriovenous grafts: a review. J Artif Organs. 2003. 6:227–235.
5. Li L, Terry CM, Shiu YT, Cheung AK. Neointimal hyperplasia associated with synthetic hemodialysis grafts. Kidney Int. 2008. 74:1247–1261.
6. Beathard GA. Gianturco self-expanding stent in the treatment of stenosis in dialysis access grafts. Kidney Int. 1993. 43:872–877.
7. Quinn SF, Schuman ES, Demlow TA, Standage BA, Ragsdale JW, Green GS, 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. 6:851–855.
8. Hoffer EK, Sultan S, Herskowitz MM, Daniels ID, Sclafani SJ. Prospective randomized trial of a metallic intravascular stent in hemodialysis graft maintenance. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1997. 8:965–973.
9. Patel RI, Peck SH, Cooper SG, Epstein DM, Sofocleous CT, Schur I, et al. Patency of Wallstents placed across the venous anastomosis of hemodialysis grafts after percutaneous recanalization. Radiology. 1998. 209:365–370.
10. Kariya S, Tanigawa N, Kojima H, Komemushi A, Shomura Y, Shiraishi T, et al. Peripheral stent placement in hemodialysis grafts. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2009. 32:960–966.
11. Liang HL, Pan HB, Lin YH, Chen CY, Chung HM, Wu TH, et al. Metallic stent placement in hemodialysis graft patients after insufficient balloon dilation. Korean J Radiol. 2006. 7:118–124.
12. Clark TW. Nitinol stents in hemodialysis access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004. 15:1037–1040.
13. Rajan DK, Saluja JS. Use of nitinol stents following recanalization of central venous occlusions in hemodialysis patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007. 30:662–667.
14. Duda SH, Wiskirchen J, Tepe G, Bitzer M, Kaulich TW, Stoeckel D, et al. Physical properties of endovascular stents: an experimental comparison. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2000. 11:645–654.
15. Vogel PM, Parise C. SMART stent for salvage of hemodialysis access grafts. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004. 15:1051–1060.
16. Kakisis JD, Avgerinos E, Giannakopoulos T, Moulakakis K, Papapetrou A, Liapis CD. Balloon angioplasty vs nitinol stent placement in the treatment of venous anastomotic stenoses of hemodialysis grafts after surgical thrombectomy. J Vasc Surg. 2012. 55:472–478.
17. Vogel PM, Parise C. Comparison of SMART stent placement for arteriovenous graft salvage versus successful graft PTA. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005. 16:1619–1626.
18. Maya ID, Allon M. Outcomes of thrombosed arteriovenous grafts: comparison of stents vs angioplasty. Kidney Int. 2006. 69:934–937.
19. Sreenarasimhaiah VP, Margassery SK, Martin KJ, Bander SJ. Salvage of thrombosed dialysis access grafts with venous anastomosis stents. Kidney Int. 2005. 67:678–684.
20. Chan MR, Bedi S, Sanchez RJ, Young HN, Becker YT, Kellerman PS, et al. Stent placement versus angioplasty improves patency of arteriovenous grafts and blood flow of arteriovenous fistulae. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2008. 3:699–705.
21. Vesely TM, Amin MZ, Pilgram T. Use of stents and stent grafts to salvage angioplasty failures in patients with hemodialysis grafts. Semin Dial. 2008. 21:100–104.
22. Jones RG, Willis AP, Jones C, McCafferty IJ, Riley PL. Long-term results of stent-graft placement to treat central venous stenosis and occlusion in hemodialysis patients with arteriovenous fistulas. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011. 22:1240–1245.
23. Anaya-Ayala JE, Smolock CJ, Colvard BD, Naoum JJ, Bismuth J, Lumsden AB, et al. Efficacy of covered stent placement for central venous occlusive disease in hemodialysis patients. J Vasc Surg. 2011. 54:754–759.
24. Kundu S, Modabber M, You JM, Tam P, Nagai G, Ting R. Use of PTFE stent grafts for hemodialysis-related central venous occlusions: intermediate-term results. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2011. 34:949–957.
25. Haskal ZJ, Trerotola S, Dolmatch B, Schuman E, Altman S, Mietling S, et al. Stent graft versus balloon angioplasty for failing dialysis-access grafts. N Engl J Med. 2010. 362:494–503.
26. Kolakowski S Jr, Dougherty MJ, Calligaro KD. Salvaging prosthetic dialysis fistulas with stents: forearm versus upper arm grafts. J Vasc Surg. 2003. 38:719–723.
TOOLS
Similar articles