X-ray-guided and ultrasound-guided percutaneous transluminal angioplasty to treat arteriovenous fistula dysfunction in hemodialysis patients: A retrospective controlled study.

Abstract

PURPOSE\nTo compare the safety and efficacy of X-ray-guided and ultrasound-guided percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in treating arteriovenous fistula dysfunction.\n\n\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\nData for 219 patients with arteriovenous fistula dysfunction between January 2016 and December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoints were technical success, clinical success, and primary patency rates. The secondary endpoints were complications and secondary patency rates. Procedure outcomes and both endpoints were evaluated by propensity score analysis.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAfter the propensity score matching, 73 matched pairs of cases were created with 34 pairs of autogenous arteriovenous fistula cases and 39 pairs of prosthetic arteriovenous graft cases. There was no significant difference between the X-ray-guided and ultrasound-guided group, respectively, regarding the technical success rate (84.9% vs 87.7%, p\u2009=\u20090.630), clinical success rate (98.6% vs 97.3%, p\u2009=\u20090.999), and complications (10.9% vs 5.5%, p\u2009=\u20090.228). Although the 6- and 12-month secondary patency rates for the dialysis access between the two groups had significant difference (p\u2009<\u20090.05), there was no significant difference in primary and secondary patency curves between the two groups (p\u2009>\u20090.05).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nThe overall efficacy of ultrasound-guided versus X-ray-guided percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in treating arteriovenous fistula dysfunction might be comparable.