Economic impact of the beneficial effect of changing vascular anastomotic technique in hemodialysis access

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 437-443

  Shenoy, Surendra ^a   Woodward, Robert S ^b  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOPLASTY; ARTERIOVENOUS FISTULA; ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL SHUNT; CLIP; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY; GRAFT PATENCY; HEMODIALYSIS; HOSPITAL CHARGE; HUMAN; KIDNEY FAILURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTPATIENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SUTURE; THROMBECTOMY; VASCULAR ACCESS;

ARTERIOVENOUS SHUNT, SURGICAL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; RENAL DIALYSIS; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; TIME FACTORS; UNITED STATES; VASCULAR PATENCY;

EID: 26844567652     PISSN: 15385744     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/153857440503900509     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Shenoy S, Miller A, Petersen F, et al: A multicenter study of permanent hemodialysis access patency: Beneficial effect of clipped vascular anastomotic technique. J Vasc Surg 38:229-235, 2003.
2. US Renal Data System web site. USRDS 2004 Annual Report: Atlas of End-stage Renal Disease in the United States. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, 2004. Available at: http://www.usrds.org
3. Feldman HIKS, Wasserstein A: Hemodialysis vascular access morbidity. J Am Soc Nephrol 7:523-535, 1996.
4. Hakim R, Himmelfarb J: Hemodialysis access failure: A call to action. Kidney Int 54:1029-1040, 1998.
5. Roy-Chaudhury P, Kelly BS, Miller MA, et al: Venous neointimal hyperplasia in polytetrafluoroethylene dialysis grafts. Kidney Int 59:2325-2334, 2001.
6. Sukhatme VP: Venous access stenosis: Prospects for prevention and therapy. Kidney Int 49:1161-1174, 1996.
7. Hasson JE, Megerman J, Abbott WM: Increased compliance near vascular anastomoses. J Vasc Surg 2: 419-423, 1985.
8. Hasson JE, Megerman J, Abbott WM: Suture technique and para anastomotic compliance. J Vasc Surg 3:591-598, 1986.
9. Kirsch WM, Zhu YH, Hardesty RA, et al: Nonpenetrating clips successfully replacing sutures in base of skull surgery. Skull Base Surg 3:171-181, 1993.
10. Hill AC, Maroney TP, Virmani R: Facilitated coronary anastomoses using a nitinol U-clip device: Bovine model. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 121:859-870, 2001.
11. Baguneid MS, Goldner S, Fulford PE, et al: A comparison of para-anastomotic compliance profiles after vascular anastomosis: Nonpenetrating clips versus standard sutures. J Vasc Surg 33:812-820, 2001.
12. Gerdisch MW, Hinkamp TJ, Ainsworth SD: Heart Surg Forum 6:2002-2004, 2003.
13. Schild AF, Raines J: Preliminary prospective randomized experience with vascular clips in the creation of arteriovenous fistulae for hemodialysis. Am J Surg 178:33-37, 1999.
14. Lin PH, Bush RL, Nelson JC, et al: A prospective evaluation of interrupted nitinol surgical clips in arteriovenous fistula for hemodialysis. Am J Surg 186:625-630, 2003.
15. Schnitzler MA, Hollenbeak CS, Cohen DS, et al: The economic implication of HLA matching in cadaveric renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 341:1440-1446, 1999.
16. Young NL, MacMillan JC, May IA, et al: Internal configuration of saphenous vein to coronary anastomoses as studied by the cast-injection technique. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 75:179-185, 1978.
17. Tozzi P, Hayoz D, Ruchat P, et al: Animal model to compare the effects of suture technique on cross-sectional compliance on end-to side anastomoses. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 19:477-481, 2001.