Use of Basilic vein in arteriovenous fistulas construction for hemodialysis access. Is it a good option alternative to prosthetic arteriovenous grafts?

Abstract

Purpose: For patients with a failed forearm autogenous fistula (AF) and an exhausted cephalic vein, there is controversy about whether a brachial basilic AF with transposition or an arteriovenous prosthetic bridging graft (BG) must be the second vascular access option. This work measured and compared these two modalities according to patency rates, complications, and revisions. Patients and methods: A retrospective study of 104 cases that had either a brachial basilic AF (72) or an Arteriovenous BG (32). Technical success, operative complications, procedurerelated mortality, maturation time, functional primary, secondary, and overall patency rates were all assessed. Results: Technical success was obtained in all participants. No procedure-linked mortality. Maturation time for BGs was significantly shorter than AFs. The complication rate was significantly higher in BGs than in AFs. The most prevalent complication was access thrombosis. The functional primary patency rate was significantly higher in AF than in BG at 12-month followup: 77.7% vs 53.1% (p < 0.012). secondary patency rate was higher in AF than in BG at 1-year follow-up 62.5% vs 42.8% (p = 0.063), respectively. In addition, BGs required more interventions to preserve patency. Conclusions: AF had higher primary, secondary and overall functional patency rates and needed fewer procedures to keep patency than BGs. Cases that need early vascular access as a result of central venous catheter complications or who have a reduced life expectancy may benefit from BGs.

Keywords

• Hemodialysis
• Basilic vein superficialization
• Arteriovenous fistula