Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Semin Dial. 2009 Jan-Feb;22(1):90-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2008.00508.x. Epub 2008 Oct 16.

Impact of training in interventional nephrology on hemodialysis vascular access types.

Author information

  • 1Division of Dialysis and Interventional Nephrology, Upper Valley Medical Center, Troy, Ohio, USA.


Vascular access has been a major problem in the management of end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD). Native arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are the preferred vascular access for ESRD patients on HD. Multiple factors have been evaluated as causes for poor AVF rates. The purpose of this retrospective analysis was to assess the impact of training of nephrologist in interventional nephrology (IN) on vascular access outcomes. We studied the rates of different types of vascular access amongst patients on chronic HD under the care of two nephrology groups over 25 months in a community dialysis unit. In group A, all vascular access were managed directly by an interventional nephrologist, while in group B they were managed by general nephrologist with no exposure to IN during their training. A total of 129 patients received dialysis for at least 4 months at the unit during those 25 months. The rate of AVFs in group A was 56.6%, while in group B the rate of AVFs was 40.8% (p = 0.059). The rate of AVGs in group A was 22.9% and in group B it was 27.6% (p = 0.647). The tunneled HD catheter rate in group A was 20.4% and in group B it was 31.6% (p = 0.098). The results of this study demonstrate that training of nephrologists in IN leads to increased use of AVF as HD vascular access. We suggest that training programs in nephrology should consider incorporating IN into their programs to increase the prevalence of AVFs.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Wiley
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk