ArticleBMC nephrology2026
Ultrasound-guided sharp recanalization for valve-related stenosis in the arteriovenous fistula: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided sharp recanalization (USR) with those of conventional percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in the treatment of venous valve-related stenosis (VVRS) in arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs).
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included patients treated between January 2023 and June 2024. Seventy-eight patients met the inclusion criteria; after excluding 13 patients lost to follow-up, 65 were analyzed (USR n = 33; PTA n = 32). One-to-one propensity score matching generated 32 matched pairs (USR n = 32; PTA n = 32). The primary outcome was 12-month primary patency; secondary outcomes included technical success, time to restenosis, and complications.After propensity score matching, 32 matched pairs were analyzed.
resultsIn the matched cohort, 12-month primary patency was higher with USR than with PTA (62.5% vs. 25.0%; HR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.18–0.70; P = 0.002). Mean time to restenosis was longer in the USR group (8.25 ± 3.42 vs. 4.48 ± 2.87 months; P = 0.021). Complications were not significantly different between groups (USR 11/32 vs. PTA 5/32), and none required open surgical intervention.
conclusionUSR may improve 12-month primary patency in VVRS compared with PTA without an observed increase in complications. Larger multicenter prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.