ArticleCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2025
Endovascular Treatment of Malfunctioning Dialysis Fistulas: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Comparing Transradial and Conventional Transvenous Access.
Article in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2025. 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVenous outflow is the favored access for endovascular management of dialysis fistulas. However, transradial access (TRA) offers advantages in specific clinical scenarios. The study aims to compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of TRA and transvenous access (TVA) in the endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, addressing the existing gap in comprehensive literature.
methodsA retrospective multi-center analysis included prospectively collected data (January 2021-November 2023) from patients undergoing endovascular management of malfunctioning dialysis fistulas with TRA. Control groups comprised patients with TVA.
resultsOf 206 patients, 62 underwent TRA, and 144 underwent TVA. Baseline demographics showed a well-matched distribution. TRA exhibited longer cannulation times but similar procedural and fluoroscopy times. Technical success rates were high for both TRA (98.4%) and TVA (97.2%). Clinical success rates were comparable (96.8% vs. 95.8%). Postprocedure access flow rates and complications demonstrated no significant differences.
conclusionsThis study provides the first direct comparison of TRA and TVA in malfunctioning dialytic fistulas. While venous outflow remains the standard vascular access site for managing malfunctioning dialysis fistulas, TRA shows comparable efficacy, safety, and feasibility, making it a viable alternative in specific clinical contexts. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the long-term durability of TRA.
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.