ArticleVascular health and risk management2024
Perioperative Vascular Access Mapping in Patients with Hemodialysis: A Comparative Study of Access Navigation and Selection in Jordan.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to elucidate the impact of three different mapping methods on the outcomes of arteriovenous fistula (AVF), including the traditional physical examination (PE) method, color duplex ultrasonography (CDU) mapping conducted by a radiologist (CDU-R), and CDU mapping performed by the operating surgeon (CDU-S). Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary center in Jordan. Patients were divided into three groups based on the venous mapping method: PE, CDU-R, and CDU-S. Various outcomes were analyzed, including immediate technical success, clinical adequacy at 3 months, and 1-year patency rates. Additional demographic and clinical factors influencing access patency or contributing to early failure were also examined. Results: The study included 303 eligible patients: 100 in the PE group, 103 in the CDU-R group, and 100 in the CDU-S group. The overall immediate technical success rate was 72%, which was highest in the CDU-S group (95%, p < 0.001). Additionally, the CDU-S group had the highest clinical access adequacy rate (78%, p < 0.01). Notably, the mapping method also influenced the anatomical location of the AVF, as none of the patients in the radiologist group had a forearm AVF. CDU-R, forearm location, intraoperative arterial calcifications, and operative duration were identified as predictors of AVF failure. Conclusion: The results suggest that perioperative vascular mapping by the operating surgeon not only results in a higher rate of immediate success but also improves access adequacy and prevents unnecessary delays in providing an effective lifeline for hemodialysis patients. The present study highlights the burden of access failure in these patients and the evolving evidence surrounding preoperative vein mapping.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.