Hemodialysis Access Type and Access Patency Loss: An Observational Cohort Study

Nicholas S Roetker; Haifeng Guo; Dena Rosen Ramey; Ciaran J McMullan; G Brandon Atkins; James B Wetmore

doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2022.100567

Hemodialysis Access Type and Access Patency Loss: An Observational Cohort Study

Kidney Med. 2022 Nov 5;5(1):100567. doi: 10.1016/j.xkme.2022.100567. eCollection 2023 Jan.

Authors

Nicholas S Roetker¹, Haifeng Guo¹, Dena Rosen Ramey², Ciaran J McMullan², G Brandon Atkins², James B Wetmore^{1

3}

Affiliations

¹ Chronic Disease Research Group, Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
² Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, New Jersey.
³ Division of Nephrology, Hennepin County Medical Center and Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Abstract

Rationale & objective: Access patency outcomes for arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) as compared with arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) in patients receiving hemodialysis (HD) who have achieved a functioning permanent access are not fully explored.

Study design: Observational cohort study.

Setting & population: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥18 years with kidney failure who were newly using a permanent access for maintenance HD from the United States Renal Data System (2010-2015). Patients using an oral anticoagulant were excluded.

Exposure: AVG or AVF.

Outcomes: Loss of primary unassisted, primary assisted, and secondary patency.

Analytical approach: Outcomes were characterized using cumulative incidence curves, and HRs adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors were estimated for the comparison of AVF versus AVG.

Results: The cohort included 60,329 and 17,763 patients newly using an AVF and AVG, respectively, for HD. Over 3 years of follow-up, AVG users, compared to AVF users, had a higher cumulative incidence of loss of primary unassisted patency (87% vs 69%; HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.52-1.60), loss of primary assisted patency (69% vs 25%; HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 3.67-3.92), and loss of secondary patency (22% vs 10%; HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.92-2.16). Stratified analyses revealed differences by subgroups; in particular, incidence of patency loss was higher among patients who underwent prior interventions to maintain prefunctional access patency and Black patients.

Limitations: This analysis focused on outcomes occurring after first successful use of a permanent access and thus does not inform about risk of patency loss during access maturation.

Conclusions: Among patients with kidney failure who successfully used a permanent access for HD, patency loss was consistently substantially higher in those using AVGs compared with AVFs. New interventions, such as prophylactic drugs, are needed to improve access longevity and reduce the need for invasive interventions, particularly among patients unable to receive a fistula.

Keywords: Arteriovenous fistula; arteriovenous graft; hemodialysis; maintenance vascular access; patency.