Advertisement

Treatment of central venous in-stent restenosis with repeat stent deployment in hemodialysis patients

Treatment of central venous in-stent restenosis with repeat stent deployment in hemodialysis patients

J Vasc Access 2017; 18(3): 214 - 219

Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

DOI:10.5301/jva.5000705

Authors

James Ronald, Bradley Davis, Carlos J. Guevara, Waleska M. Pabon-Ramos, Tony P. Smith, Charles Y. Kim

Abstract

To report patency rates for stent deployment for treatment of in-stent stenosis of the central veins of the chest in hemodialysis patients.

A retrospective analysis was performed on 29 patients who underwent 35 secondary percutaneous transluminal stent (PTS) deployments for in-stent stenosis within the central veins that were refractory to angioplasty and ipsilateral to a functioning hemodialysis access (in-stent PTS group). For comparison, patency data were acquired for 47 patients who underwent 78 successful percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) procedures for in-stent stenosis (in-stent PTA group) and 55 patients who underwent 55 stent deployments within native central vein stenosis refractory to angioplasty (native vein PTS group).

The 3-, 6-, and 12-month primary lesion patency for the in-stent PTS group was 73%, 57%, and 32%, respectively. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month primary patency for the in-stent PTA group was 70%, 38%, and 17% and for the native vein PTS group was 78%, 57%, and 26%, which were similar to the in-stent PTS group (p = 0.20 and 0.41, respectively). The 3-, 6-, and 12-month secondary access patency was 91%, 73%, and 65% for the in-stent PTS group. Sub-analysis of the in-stent PTS group revealed no difference in primary (p = 0.93) or secondary patency rates (p = 0.27) of bare metal stents (n = 23) compared with stent grafts (n = 12).

Stent deployment for central vein in-stent stenosis refractory to angioplasty was associated with reasonable patency rates, which were similar to in-stent PTA and native vein PTS.

Article History

Disclosures

Financial support: No grants or funding have been received for this study.
Conflict of interest: None of the authors has financial interest related to this study to disclose.

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

  • Ronald, James [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1
  • Davis, Bradley [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1
  • Guevara, Carlos J. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 2
  • Pabon-Ramos, Waleska M. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1
  • Smith, Tony P. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1
  • Kim, Charles Y. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1, * Corresponding Author (charles.kim@duke.edu)

Affiliations

  •  Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC - USA
  •  Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St Louis, MO - USA

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.