AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightThere was no statisticallysignificant difference in the patency rates or postoperative complications between the groups.Conclusion: Owing to their low complication and high patency rates, both basilic vein superficialization and basilic vein transposition canbe safely employed in patients in whom arteriovenous fistula cannot be established with the cephalic vein.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Özet
Objectives: This study presents our long-term follow-up results of patients undergoing basilic vein superficialization and basilic veintransposition.Patients and methods: Medical records of a total of 71 patients (32 males, 39 females; mean age 56.7 years, range, 31 to 76 years) undergoingbrachiobasilic arteriovenous fistula surgery for hemodialysis access between January 2010 and March 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of access procedure as the basilic vein superficialization group (n=42) andbasilic vein transposition group (n=29). The primary and secondary patency rates were evaluated.Results: The mean follow-up was 18.8 months. In the early postoperative period, bleeding or hematoma developed in 13, extremity edemain 11, and superficial wound site infection in four patients. Surgical methods were applied to six of 11 patients who developed fistulathrombosis during follow-up, while interventional methods were applied to five patients. Primary and secondary patency rates were 86%and 90%, respectively in the superficialization group and 76% and 90%, respectively in the transposition group. There was no statisticallysignificant difference in the patency rates or postoperative complications between the groups.Conclusion: Owing to their low complication and high patency rates, both basilic vein superficialization and basilic vein transposition canbe safely employed in patients in whom arteriovenous fistula cannot be established with the cephalic vein.