Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Ann Vasc Surg. 2003 Sep;17(5):516-21. Epub 2003 Oct 2.

Long-term follow-up of polyurethane vascular grafts for hemoaccess bridge fistulas.

Author information

1
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Dokkyo University Koshigaya Hospital, Saitama, Japan. hykiyama@da2.so-net.ne.jp

Abstract

The new polyurethane vascular graft (PVG) has been reported to be better than the expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) graft in terms of early access and prompt hemostasis, but long-term patency and safety of PVGs have not been investigated objectively. To evaluate late clinical outcome of the PVG, we compared the complication and patency rates of stretch PTFE grafts with those of PVGs implanted for hemodialysis vascular access. Subjects were 53 patients who received 58 arteriovenous grafts between October 1997 and July 2000. They were divided in a prospective fashion into two groups according to the type of implanted graft: PVG ( n = 30) or PTFE ( n = 28). The study group comprised 27 men and 31 women with a mean age of 61.7 +/- 10.9 years (range: 23-84 years). The average number of previous accesses was 5.1 +/- 3.1 (range: 0-12). There were no differences between the groups in term of age, sex, body surface area, etiology of renal disease, presence of diabetes, previous access procedures, anatomical positions of grafts, or mean follow-up period. Primary patency rates for the PVG and PTFE grafts were equivalent at 1 year (60.7% vs. 56.5%) and at 2 years (54.7% vs. 51.8%). Similarly, secondary patency rates for the two groups did not differ at 1 year (78.7% vs. 79.9%) or at 2 years (78.7% vs. 69.3%). These findings indicate that the PVG is an acceptable alternative to the PTFE graft for blood access.

PMID:
14517729
DOI:
10.1007/s10016-003-0061-7
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center