Double Mesh Nitinol Stent Versus Self-expanding Stent-graft in Recurrent/Resistant Cephalic Vein Arch Stenoses in Dialysis Fistulae: A Comparative Study

摘要

Purpose To compare the double mesh nitinol stent (DNS) versus the self-expanding stent-graft (SES) in recurrent/resistant cephalic vein arch stenosis in dialysis fistulae. Materials and Methods 17 cases with recurrent/resistant stenosis of the cephalic vein arch treated with a DNS were compared retrospectively with 18 cases treated with an SES. Stenting was performed either for significant recoil post-angioplasty with high-pressure balloons or in recurrent stenoses. Patients were followed up with Doppler ultrasound in our vascular access surveillance programme. Primary and assisted primary patency rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results Both stents showed 100% technical success immediately post-stenting, defined as residual stenosis < 30%. 3, 6 and 12 month primary patency of the DNS was 82.4%, 69.7% and 28.1% versus 88.9%, 77.8% and 72.2% for the SES. The DNS had a mean primary patency of 242.4 days compared to 896.3 days for the SES (p = 0.021). 12 month assisted primary patency was 88.2% (DNS) and 100% (SES). The DNS had a mean assisted primary patency of 812 days compared to 1390.3 days for the SES, though this did not reach statistical significance. No stent fractures were identified at 2 years in either group. Conclusion Both stents had 100% technical success with no stent fractures. SES showed statistically significant higher primary patency. Assisted primary patency was also higher, though this did not reach statistical significance.