Key result
Distal radial access for vascular access intervention therapy achieved a 97.8% success rate, which was not different from the 98.3% success rate of standard access.
Why the study?
The feasibility and safety of distal radial access for vascular access intervention therapy in arteriovenous fistula stenosis had not been established.
Does distal radial access maintain procedural success and improve safety compared to standard access for vascular access intervention therapy in hemodialysis patients?
Cohort (n=421)
No
Does distal radial access maintain procedural success and improve safety compared to standard access for vascular access intervention therapy in hemodialysis patients?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Distal radial access is a feasible and safe alternative to standard brachial or venous access for vascular access intervention therapy, offering high procedural success without increasing access-site complications.
Distal radial access (DRA) has emerged as an alternative approach to reduce the risk of radial artery occlusion in coronary angiography. Vascular access intervention therapy (VAIVT) is traditionally used to treat arteriovenous fistula stenosis. However, the feasibility and safety of DRA for VAIVT have not been established. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of using DRA for VAIVT. We included 421 consecutive VAIVT procedures for upper limb arteriovenous fistulas retrospectively. DRA for VAIVT was performed in 181 procedures (DRA group), and the remaining procedures were approached through the brachial artery or vein (SA group: standard access group). Clinical follow-up was performed to evaluate the incidence of hematoma and dialysis access-associated steal syndrome (DASS). The mean follow-up duration following VAIVT was 24.0 months. The VAIVT success rate did not differ significantly between the groups (DRA: 97.8% vs. SA: 98.3%; P = 0.73), neither did the incidence of puncture site hematoma (DRA: 0.0% vs. SA: 0.8%; P = 0.51). There were no complications with DASS symptoms in the DRA group during the clinical follow-up. In the DRA group, 90 patients underwent a subsequent VAIVT procedure, and 85 patients (94.4%) underwent a subsequent VAIVT by DRA. DRA is a feasible and safe strategy for VAIVT and could be considered an option for VAIVT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuroda et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Upper limb arteriovenous fistulas requiring vascular access intervention therapy (n=421). Distal radial access vs. Standard access (brachial artery or vein) was evaluated on Success of VAIVT procedures (free from circuit reconstruction) (p=0.73). Distal radial access for vascular access intervention therapy achieved a 97.8% success rate, which was not different from the 98.3% success rate of standard access.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: