TY - JOUR
T1 - Upper extremity central venous obstruction in hemodialysis patients
T2 - Treatment with Wallstents
AU - Vesely, Thomas M.
AU - Hovsepian, David M.
AU - Pilgram, Thomas K.
AU - Coyne, Daniel W.
AU - Shenoy, Surendra
PY - 1997/8
Y1 - 1997/8
N2 - PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of using Wallstents to treat subclavian or brachiocephalic venous obstruction after unsuccessful angioplasty, in patients undergoing hemodialysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dialysis records, radiology reports, and procedural images of 20 hemodialysis patients who underwent Wallstent insertion into a subclavian (n = 11) or brachiocephalic (n = 9) vein were reviewed. Technical success and primary, assisted primary, and cumulative patency rates were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-three Wallstents were inserted for stenosis (n = 18) or occlusion (n = 2). Technical success was 100%. Eight patients underwent 11 reinterventions to maintain patency of the Wallstent during the follow-up period. Patency rates of the Wallstent were (av) primary at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year: 90%, 67%, 42%, and 25%; (b) assisted primary at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year: 88%, 62%, and 47%; and (c) cumulative at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years: 89%, 64%, 56%, and 22%. Considerable shortening of the stent occurred in five patients. One occurred immediately during the deployment procedure, but four were discovered weeks to months later. No other complications occurred. CONCLUSION: After suboptimal angioplasty, treatment of subclavian and brachiocephalic vein stenoses with a Wallstent can provide continued use of a hemodialysis access. Close clinical surveillance and multiple reinterventions are necessary to maintain Wallstent patency.
AB - PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of using Wallstents to treat subclavian or brachiocephalic venous obstruction after unsuccessful angioplasty, in patients undergoing hemodialysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dialysis records, radiology reports, and procedural images of 20 hemodialysis patients who underwent Wallstent insertion into a subclavian (n = 11) or brachiocephalic (n = 9) vein were reviewed. Technical success and primary, assisted primary, and cumulative patency rates were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-three Wallstents were inserted for stenosis (n = 18) or occlusion (n = 2). Technical success was 100%. Eight patients underwent 11 reinterventions to maintain patency of the Wallstent during the follow-up period. Patency rates of the Wallstent were (av) primary at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year: 90%, 67%, 42%, and 25%; (b) assisted primary at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year: 88%, 62%, and 47%; and (c) cumulative at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years: 89%, 64%, 56%, and 22%. Considerable shortening of the stent occurred in five patients. One occurred immediately during the deployment procedure, but four were discovered weeks to months later. No other complications occurred. CONCLUSION: After suboptimal angioplasty, treatment of subclavian and brachiocephalic vein stenoses with a Wallstent can provide continued use of a hemodialysis access. Close clinical surveillance and multiple reinterventions are necessary to maintain Wallstent patency.
KW - Dialysis, shunts
KW - Veins, grafts and prostheses
KW - Veins, innominate
KW - Veins, stenosis or obstruction
KW - Veins, subclavian
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030851346&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/radiology.204.2.9240518
DO - 10.1148/radiology.204.2.9240518
M3 - Article
C2 - 9240518
AN - SCOPUS:0030851346
SN - 0033-8419
VL - 204
SP - 343
EP - 348
JO - Radiology
JF - Radiology
IS - 2
ER -