Cochrane Renal Group

 Back
autoid 17
crg_id CRG080500007
titleoftrial Endovascular versus surgical pre-emptive repair of forearm arterio-venous fistula juxta-anastomotic stenosis: a prospective controlled concurrent trial
acronymnoftrial PTA vs Surgery in pre-emptive repair of stenosed AVFs
website http://
identificationno
leadprefix Dr
leadsurname Tessitore
leadgivennames Nicola
leadposition Chief - Hemodialysis Unit Ospedale Policlinico
leaddepartment Division of Nephrology
leadorganisation Azienda Ospedaliera di Verona
leadaddress Piazzale LA Scuro 10 - 37134 Verona, Italy
leademail nicola.tessitore@azosp.vr.it
leadphone +39 045 8074652
leadfax +39 045 8074687
leadsuffix
contactprefix Dr
contactsurname
contactgivennames
contactposition
contactdepartment
contactorganisation
contactaddress
contactemail
contactphone
contactfax
funding
otherfunding no funding
fundingnameofsponsors
ethicsapproval no
studytype nonrandomised
studytype_other prospective controlled concurrent
groupassignment parallel
blinding_patients no
blinding_investigators no
blinding_outcomes no
blinding_analysts no
proposedstart 01/1999
actualstart 01/1999
proposedcompletiondate 01/2004
actualcompletiondate 11/2004
multi_center_study no
numberofcentres
multi_national_study no
countrycentres Italy
researchquestion Both surgery and angioplasty (PTA) are used in the pre-emptive repair of perianastomotic stenosis in forearm arterio-venous fistulae (AVFs).Surgery is considered the preferred treatment (Bakran et al:Vascular Access Society Guidelines.Pabst Science Pub.,2003), because it is minimally invasive and primary patency rates in surgical series are higher than after dilatation.No prospective comparative trials betwwen the two procedures have been reported todate. We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected concurrent data to compare cot-effectiveness of surgery and PTA in the pre-emptive treatment of perianastomotic stenoses in forearm AVFs.
study_status_recruitment no_longer_recruiting
study_status_recruitment_follow completed
healthcarecondition Chronic hemodialysis, arteriovenous fistula, repair of stenosis
intervention1 Pre-emptive surgical revision of stenosis.Since guidelines consider surgery the treatment of choice, the surgical group was considered the Control arm of the study.
intervention2 Pre-emptive angioplasty
intervention3
intervention4
participants_gender both
participants_other
age 25 - 85
totalrecruitment
inclusion Hemodialysis patients with functioning(able to provide adequate dialysis), mature, forearm AVFs with angiographically-proven significant (> 50 %)juxta-anastomotic venous (first 5 cm of the draining vein) stenosis
exclusion Hemodialysis patients with prostethic grafts or upper-arm or elbow AVFs or forearm non-stenotic AVFs or malfunctioning AVFs
primaryoutcomes 1)Restenosis interval, equivalent to post-intervention primary patency and defined as the interval between the surgical or endovascular procedure to restenosis or access thrombosis. Restenosis was angiographically-proven and it was identified by surveillance based on quarterly access blood flow (Qa) measurement.
2)Intervention procedure failure, equivalent to post-intervention assisted primary patency and defined as the interval between the surgical or endovascular procedure and re-intervention by another procedure or access thrombosi or access abandonment.
secondaryoutcomes To compare direct access-care related costs of the two procedures, including all expenses for correcting stenosis and for treat procedure failure.
reference Tessitore N, Lipari G et al. A prospective controlled trial on surgical vs endovascular treatment of stenosis in foreman arteriovenous fistulae (AVF)[abstract no: SU-FC082]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2004; 15 Oct Abstracts: 61A [Free Communication. ASN Renal Week, St Louis,MO, October 27-November 1, 2004]