Saphenofemoral arteriovenous fistula as hemodialysis access

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>An upper limb arteriovenous (AV) fistula is the access of choice for haemodialysis (HD). There have been few reports of saphenofemoral AV fistulas (SFAVF) over the last 10-20 years because of previous suggestions of poor patencies and needling difficulties. Here, we describe our clinical experience with SFAVF.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>SFAVFs were evaluated using the following variables: immediate results, early and late complications, intraoperative and postoperative complications (up to day 30), efficiency of the fistula after the onset of needling and complications associated to its use.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifty-six SFAVF fistulas were created in 48 patients. Eight patients had two fistulas: 8 patent (16%), 10 transplanted (20%), 12 deaths (24%), 1 low flow (2%) and 20 thrombosis (39%) (first two months of preparation). One patient had severe hypotension during surgery, which caused thrombosis of the fistula, which was successfully thrombectomised, four thrombosed fistulae were successfully thrombectomised and revised on the first postoperative day. After 59 months of follow-up, primary patency was 44%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>SFAVF is an adequate alternative for patients without the possibility for other access in the upper limbs, allowing efficient dialysis with good long-term patency with a low complication rate.</p

Calcineurin-Inhibitor Minimization in Liver Transplant Patients with Calcineurin-Inhibitor-Related Renal Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Introduction of calcineurin-inhibitor (CNI) has made transplantation a miracle in the past century. However, the side effects of long-term use of CNI turn out to be one of the major challenges in the current century. Among these, renal dysfunction attracts more and more attention. Herein, we undertook a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of calcineurin-inhibitor (CNI) minimization protocols in liver transplant recipients with CNI-related renal dysfunction. METHODS: We included randomized trials with no year and language restriction. All data were analyzed using random effect model by Review Manager 5.0. The primary endpoints were glomerular filtration rate (GFR), serum creatinine level (sCr) and creatinine clearance rate (CrCl), and the secondary endpoints were acute rejection episodes, incidence of infection and patient survival at the end of follow-up. RESULTS: GFR was significantly improved in CNI minimization group than in routine CNI regimen group (Z = 5.45, P<0.00001; I(2) = 0%). Likely, sCr level was significantly lower in the CNI minimization group (Z = 2.84, P = 0.005; I(2) = 39%). However, CrCl was not significantly higher in the CNI minimization group (Z = 1.59, P = 0.11; I(2) = 0%). Both acute rejection episodes and patient survival were comparable between two groups (rejection: Z = 0.01, P = 0.99; I(2) = 0%; survival: Z = 0.28, P = 0.78; I(2) = 0%, respectively). However, current CNI minimization protocols may be related to a higher incidence of infections (Z = 3.06, P = 0.002; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSION: CNI minimization can preserve or even improve renal function in liver transplant patients with renal impairment, while sharing similar short term acute rejection rate and patient survival with routine CNI regimen