A well-functioning hemodialysis vascular access is a decisive factor in the survival of hemodialysis patients, who have a high mortality rate. 85% of these hemodialysis patients, are treated via an arteriovenous fistula (AVF). However, the primary patency of AVFs at 1 year is 60%, mainly due to neointimal hyperplasia developing in the drainage vein, which leads to stenosis and, if left untreated, thrombosis of the AVF. Indeed, forty percent of hemodialysis patients require re-intervention on their vascular access within the year, due to stenosis on their AVF. Transluminal angioplasty (TLA) is currently used as first-line treatment for these stenoses but TLA itself causes vascular damage, with early recurrence of the stenosis in 50% of cases at 6 months, and necessitating repeated interventions. In recent years several endovascular techniques have been developed to limit the risk of re-stenosis, none of which have produced significantly better results than simple TLA. Eliminating intimal hyperplasia using a minimally invasive endovascular technique, rather than crushing it with simple angioplasty, would improve restenosis-free survival in these patients. Today, endovascular rotational atherectomy techniques are available to improve the patency of angioplasty in the treatment of complex arterial lesions of the coronary arteries and lower limbs. The atherotome is a guide-mounted catheter with a small burr at its distal end, which resects the atheromatous plaque whereas angioplasty simply crushes it. Atherectomy is followed by drug-eluting balloon (DEB) angioplasty with paclitaxel release to limit restenosis through its anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative activity. A few cases of rotational atherectomy for the treatment of calcified stenoses in saphenous vein coronary bypasses have been reported in the literature, with encouraging results. If AVF re-stenosis should occur, the intimal hyperplasia can be removed endovascularly, thereby limiting the risk of short-term iterative stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare the 6-month re-stenosis rate with this technique (atherectomy + drug-eluting balloon) versus standard angioplasty + drug-eluting balloon for the treatment of restenosis of hemodialysis vascular accesses.
A well-functioning hemodialysis vascular access is a decisive factor in the survival of hemodialysis patients, who have a high mortality rate. 85% of these hemodialysis patients, are treated via an arteriovenous fistula (AVF), which is currently the access offering the best results in terms of patency and infectious risk. However, the primary patency of AVFs at 1 year is 60%, mainly due to the development of neointimal hyperplasia in the drainage vein, which leads to stenosis and, if left untreated, thrombosis of the AVF. Forty percent of hemodialysis patients on AVF will therefore have at least one intervention on their vascular access within the year, due to stenosis on their AVF. Transluminal angioplasty (TLA) is currently used as first-line treatment for these stenoses. However, TLA itself causes vascular damage, with migration and myofibroblast proliferation responsible for abnormal vascular remodeling, leading to early recurrence of the stenosis in 50% of cases at 6 months, limiting the long-term functionality of these angioplasties and necessitating repeated interventions on these patients. For all these reasons, developing techniques to limit the risk of re-stenosis of hemodialysis AVFs is a public health issue. In recent years several endovascular techniques have been developed to limit the risk of re-stenosis: paclitaxel-coated "active" balloon angioplasty, bare or covered stenting, none of which have produced significantly better results than simple TLA. Eliminating intimal hyperplasia using a minimally invasive endovascular technique, rather than crushing it with simple angioplasty, would improve restenosis-free survival in these patients, without increasing the burden of management. Today, endovascular rotational atherectomy techniques are available to improve the patency of angioplasty in the treatment of complex arterial lesions of the coronary arteries and lower limbs. The atherotome is a guide-mounted catheter with a small burr at its distal end, which resects the atheromatous plaque where angioplasty simply crushes it. Atherectomy is followed by drug-eluting balloon angioplasty with paclitaxel release to limit restenosis through its anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative activity. A few cases of rotational atherectomy for the treatment of calcified stenoses in saphenous vein coronary bypasses have been reported in the literature, with encouraging results and the absence of complications, notably perforation. If AVF re-stenosis should occur, the intimal hyperplasia can be removed endovascularly, thereby limiting the risk of short-term iterative stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare the 6-month re-stenosis rate with this technique (atherectomy + drug-eluting balloon) versus standard angioplasty + drug-eluting balloon for the treatment of restenosis of hemodialysis vascular accesses.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
40
Treatment of restenosis of hemodialysis vascular access via the standard angioplasty + drug-eluting balloon technique
Treatment of restenosis of hemodialysis vascular access via the atherectomy + drug-eluting balloon technique
Re-stenosis rate at 6 months in the control group
YES/NO Significant restenosis is defined on echodoppler by a combination of \> 50% venous lumen reduction with a systolic peak ratio \> 2 associated with: i) either an internal residual diameter \< 2 mm, ii) or a flow reduction \> 25% or flow \< 500 ml/min.
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Re-stenosis rate at 6 months in the experimental group
YES/NO Significant restenosis is defined on echodoppler by a combination of \> 50% venous lumen reduction with a systolic peak ratio \> 2 associated with: i) either an internal residual diameter \< 2 mm, ii) or a flow reduction \> 25% or flow \< 500 ml/min.
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Time to re-stenosis in the control group
Time (days) from surgery to onset of restenosis as defined above.
Time frame: Up to 6 months postoperative
Time to re-stenosis in the experimental group
Time (days) from surgery to onset of restenosis as defined above.
Time frame: Up to 6 months postoperative
Rate of complications in the control group
Collection of complications related to surgical technique: perforation (assessed by the operator intraoperatively: extravasation of contrast medium at fistulographic control), false aneurysm (assessed at follow-up echodoppler).
Time frame: Up to 6 months' follow-up.
Rate of complications in the experimental group
Collection of complications related to surgical technique: perforation (assessed by the operator intraoperatively: extravasation of contrast medium at fistulographic control), false aneurysm (assessed at follow-up echodoppler).
Time frame: Up to 6 months' follow-up.
Intermediate re-stenosis at 1 month in the control group
Intermediate patency assessed by significant restenosis as defined above
Time frame: At 1 month postoperative
Intermediate re-stenosis at 1 month in the experimental group
Intermediate patency assessed by significant restenosis as defined above
Time frame: At 1 month postoperative
Intermediate re-stenosis at 3 months in the control group
Intermediate patency assessed by significant restenosis as defined above
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Intermediate re-stenosis at 3 months in the experimental group
Intermediate patency assessed by significant restenosis as defined above
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Systolic velocity in the control group
Systolic velocity (ml/s) assessed by echodoppler
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Systolic velocity in the experimental group
Systolic velocity (ml/s) assessed by echodoppler
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Systolic velocity in the control group
Systolic velocity (ml/s) assessed by echodoppler
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Systolic velocity in the experimental group
Systolic velocity (ml/s) assessed by echodoppler
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Venous lumen at 1 month in the control group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 1 month postoperative
Venous lumen at 1 month in the experimental group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 1 month postoperative
Venous lumen at 3 months in the control group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Venous lumen at 3 months in the experimental group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 3 months postoperative
Venous lumen at 6 months in the control group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Venous lumen at 6 months in the experimental group
Measurement of venous lumen as a percentage on echodoppler
Time frame: At 6 months postoperative
Re-intervention rate for thrombosis in the control group
Occurrence of re-intervention for thrombosis: yes/no.
Time frame: Up to 6 months postoperative
Re-intervention rate for thrombosis in the experimental group
Occurrence of re-intervention for thrombosis: yes/no.
Time frame: Up to 6 months postoperative
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.