6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Green Renal Replacement Therapy: Caring for the Environment

      Submit here before July 31, 2024

      About Blood Purification: 3.0 Impact Factor I 5.6 CiteScore I 0.83 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Racial and Gender Differences in Arteriovenous Fistula Use among Incident Hemodialysis Patients

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Arteriovenous fistula (AVF) use is reported to differ among racial and gender groups. We sought to identify risk factors associated with incident AVF and whether racial and gender differences in AVF use persist after controlling for these factors. Methods: We evaluated 28,712 incident adult hemodialysis patients (age ≧18) from five ESRD networks starting dialysis between June 1, 2005 and May 31, 2006. Data were obtained from the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services 2728 form. Results: Incident AVF use was reported for 11% of black and 12% of white patients [OR = 0.89 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.96)], and for 9% of females and 13% of males [OR = 0.66 (0.62–0.71)]. After adjusting for facility clustering, blacks were as likely as whites to use an AVF [OR = 1.00 (0.92–1.09)], while gender differences persisted [OR = 0.64 (0.59–0.69)]. Compared to patients with no renal care prior to dialysis initiation, incident AVF use was 16-fold greater among those with ≧12 months of nephrology care [OR = 15.99 (13.25–19.29)], 9-fold greater among those with 6–12 months of care [OR = 9.00 (7.45–10.88)] and 7-fold greater among those with at least 6 months of care [OR = 7.13 (5.73–8.88)]. Conclusion: Racial, but not gender, differences in incident AVF use were eliminated after accounting for clustering within facilities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Type of vascular access and survival among incident hemodialysis patients: the Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for ESRD (CHOICE) Study.

          Arteriovenous fistulae (AVF) have advantages over arteriovenous grafts (AVG) and central venous catheters (CVC), but whether AVF are associated independently with better survival is unclear. Recent studies showing such a survival benefit did not include early access experience or account for changes in access type over time and did not include data on some important confounders. Reported here are survival rates stratified by the type of access in use up to 3 yr after initiation of hemodialysis among 616 incident patients who were enrolled in the Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for ESRD (CHOICE) Study. A total of 1084 accesses (185 AVF, 296 AVG, 603 CVC) were used for a total of 1381 person-years. At initiation, 409 (66%) patients were using a CVC, 122 (20%) were using an AVG, and 85 (14%) were using an AVF. After 6 mo, 34% were using a CVC, 40% were using an AVG, and 26% were using an AVF. Annual mortality rates were 11.7% for AVF, 14.2% for AVG, and 16.1% for CVC. Adjusted relative hazards (RH) of death compared with AVF were 1.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 2.2) for CVC and 1.2 (0.8 to 1.8) for AVG. The increased hazards associated with CVC, as compared with AVF, were stronger in men (n = 334; RH = 2.0; P = 0.01) than women (n = 282; RH = 1.0 for CVC; P = 0.92). These results strongly support existing clinical practice guidelines and suggest that the use of venous catheters should be minimized to reduce the frequency of access complications and to improve patient survival, especially among male hemodialysis patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Vascular access and increased risk of death among hemodialysis patients.

            Hemodialysis with a venous catheter increases the risk of infection. The extent to which venous catheters are associated with an increased risk of death among hemodialysis patients has not been extensively studied. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 7497 prevalent hemodialysis patients to assess the association between dialysis with a venous catheter and risk of death due to all causes and to infection. A tunneled cuffed catheter was used for access in 12% of the patients and non-cuffed, not tunneled catheter in 2%. Younger age (P = 0.0005), black race (P = 0.0022), female gender (P = 0.0004), short duration since starting dialysis (P = 0.0003) and impaired functional status (P = 0.0001) were independently associated with increased use of catheter access. The proportion of patients who died was higher among those who were dialyzed with a non-cuffed (16.8%) or cuffed (15.2%) catheter compared to those dialyzed with either a graft (9.1%) or a fistula (7.3%; P < 0.001). The proportion of deaths due to infection was higher among patients dialyzed with a catheter (3.4%) compared to those dialyzed with either a graft (1.2%) or a fistula (0.8%; P < 0.001). The adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for all-cause and infection-related death among patients dialyzed with a catheter was 1.4 (1.1, 1.9) and 3.0 (1.4, 6.6), respectively, compared to those with an arteriovenous (AV) fistula. Venous catheters are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and infection-related mortality among hemodialysis patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predialysis nephrologic care and a functioning arteriovenous fistula at entry are associated with better survival in incident hemodialysis patients: an observational cohort study.

              Late nephrologist referral may adversely affect outcome in patients initiating maintenance hemodialysis therapy, mostly with temporary catheters that may further increase morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to evaluate the influence of 2 variables on mortality: presentation mode (planned versus unplanned) and type of access (arteriovenous fistula [AVF] versus temporary catheter) at entry. This was a 3-center, 5-year, prospective, observational, cohort study of 538 incident patients. Measurements included presentation mode, type of access, renal function and biochemical test results at entry, and stratification of risk groups. Main outcome measures were mortality and hospitalization. Of 281 planned patients (52%), 73% initiated therapy with an AVF. Of 257 unplanned patients (48%), 70% initiated therapy with a catheter (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that unplanned presentation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 2.44) and initiation of therapy with catheter (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.46) were independently associated with greater mortality and similar HRs after adjusting for confounders. At 12 months, the number of deaths was 3 times higher in both the unplanned versus planned groups and catheter versus AVF groups. The joint effect of unplanned dialysis initiation and catheter use had an additive impact on mortality (HR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.97 to 4.22). Greater hematocrit (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.09) and albumin level (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.33) showed an independent association with survival, underscoring the benefits of predialysis care. Using Poisson regression, all-cause hospitalization (incidence rate ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.36 to 1.79; P < 0.001) and infection-related (incidence rate ratio, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.91 to 3.59; P < 0.001) and vascular access-related (incidence rate ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.94; P < 0.003) admissions were higher in unplanned patients initiating therapy with a catheter than in planned patients initiating therapy with an AVF, after adjusting for confounders. Unplanned dialysis initiation and temporary catheter were independently associated with greater mortality rates in incident patients. The combined influence of both variables was associated with greater morbidity and mortality than either variable alone.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                AJN
                Am J Nephrol
                10.1159/issn.0250-8095
                American Journal of Nephrology
                S. Karger AG
                0250-8095
                1421-9670
                2010
                September 2010
                27 July 2010
                : 32
                : 3
                : 234-241
                Affiliations
                aRenal Division, School of Medicine, and bRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Ga., USA
                Author notes
                *Haimanot Wasse, MD, MPH, Emory University, Renal Division, Woodruff Memorial Building, Room 338, 1630 Pierce Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322 (USA), Tel. +1 404 727 1598, E-Mail hwasse@emory.edu
                Article
                318152 PMC2980520 Am J Nephrol 2010;32:234–241
                10.1159/000318152
                PMC2980520
                20664254
                b92761d7-949b-4b94-ade4-507630dff6c2
                © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 26 May 2010
                : 24 June 2010
                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 26, Pages: 8
                Categories
                Original Report: Patient-Oriented, Translational Research

                Cardiovascular Medicine,Nephrology
                Adequacy of care,Chronic kidney disease,Vascular access
                Cardiovascular Medicine, Nephrology
                Adequacy of care, Chronic kidney disease, Vascular access

                Comments

                Comment on this article