Safe and effective HeRO graft placement: Technique and results.

OBJECTIVES: Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow (HeRO) grafts are used when venous outflow is inadequate to support conventional access. These have been perceived as complex to implant and being associated with high risk. We have evolved a defined protocol for insertion that minimizes morbidity and maximizes efficiency. METHODS: Our protocol includes staged intravenous access versus HeRO graft placement, reverse Trendelenburg positioning, subcutaneous access of the deep portion of the existing catheter, use of a stiff wire placed within the inferior vena cava, dilation of the tract to 8 mm, device lubrication, all insertion procedures directly visualized, and use of immediate access conduits with SuperHeRO connector. RESULTS: From 7/1/18 to 8/13/19, 55 HeRO grafts were placed at our institution following this protocol, average age 58 ± 15 (26-86) years (mean ± SD, range). 53 (96%) had had prior ipsilateral central access (13 by means of "inside out" 2 weeks prior) the other two had on-table access. Mean procedure time was 70 ± 26 (38-148) min. Excluding seven "complex" cases, procedure time for our first 20 cases using this protocol was 72 ± 29 min, while that of the last 28 was 62 ± 18 min (p < 0.05). One patient suffered acute CHF after unclamping; despite reclamping and ligation he died on POD 3 (mortality rate 2%). 71% were done as outpatients, and 47 of 53 evaluable patients (89%) had their grafts used within 36 h for dialysis. Only one patient (2%) has had an infection within 30 days (cellulitis). At a mean followup of 95 ± 105 (maximum 383) days, three additional patients have had graft infections requiring excision, for a total infection rate of 5/53 (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that HeRO graft placement can be performed with minimal morbidity and mortality on an outpatient basis. Short-term infection rates are low and 89% of patients have their grafts immediately accessed and are discharged without a catheter.

Results of first stage brachiobasilic and brachiobrachial fistula creation: Implications for staged versus single procedure decision making.

INTRODUCTION: Transposed brachiobasilic AV fistulas (BVT) have increasingly been performed in two stages. Published reports give conflicting results, perhaps in part as many reports of staged procedures eliminate those patients who "fail" the first stage (i.e. are lost to follow-up in addition to anatomic failure). METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was reviewed to identify all patients at two institutions who underwent the first stage of planned two-stage BVT by the senior author. Success in this context was defined as patients who eventually underwent second stage fistula creation, leaving the operating room after the second stage with a patent, transposed fistula. RESULTS: From October 2012 to June 2020, 218 patients underwent first-stage procedures. At the first visit, 185 (85%) of fistulas were patent, 23 (11%) were occluded, 8 (4%) of patients were lost to follow-up, and 2 (1%) died. In the interval before the second operation, another eight (4%) patients were lost to follow-up, two were cancelled for medical reasons, and two declined surgery, leaving a total of 173 patients who made it to the second stage (80%). At operation, four patients were found to have unusable veins, leaving a total of 169 patients who completed both stages. If all patients who underwent first stage are included, 77% of patients entering this pathway left the OR after their second stage with patent access. If those lost to follow-up are excluded, this number increases to 84%, while if all those lost to follow-up are assumed to mature, success increases to 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on results in patients lost to follow-up, between 77% and 85% of patients undergoing first stage brachiobasilic fistulae undergo successful second stage transposition. These numbers are equivalent or slightly lower than published maturation rates for single-stage BVT, so there is little margin for failure at the second stage.

The role of surgery for assisted maturation after endovascular and percutaneous arteriovenous fistula creation.

Even in the best of circumstances, a significant number of patients will require adjunctive endovascular and/or surgical revision prior to achieving functional patency after endovascular or percutaneous AVF creation, at least within the United States. This rate appears to be higher after percutaneous AVF than after endovascular AVF, although because published reports of the former are mostly derived from American experience and those of the latter derived from experience outside the United States, it is unclear whether these differences are due to the technique itself or cultural and/or anatomic differences in dialysis access practices and patient populations. If arterial inflow is poor, this should be corrected first. When flow is adequate (perhaps 900 cc/min) but no single vein is cannulatable, a dominant suitable vein can be superficialized or transposed. If no suitable vein is dominant (most accurately assessed by using an intraoperative flowmeter), the best vein can be used, with or without occlusion of the other veins or reimplantation into the brachial artery. Finally, if the original anastomosis remains the sole supply to the cannulated vein, the original fistula has achieved assisted primary maturation (and assisted primary patency continues), while if a new arteriovenous anastomosis has been constructed, the original fistula has failed. We point out that for this reason as well as to best utilize the upper arm for later access, endovascular and percutaneous AVFs should be constructed and maintained within an atmosphere where both surgeons and non-surgeons work together on the overall access plan.

Preemptive surgery for premalignant foregut lesions.

INTRODUCTION: Preemptive surgery is the prophylactic removal of an organ at high risk for malignant transformation or the resection of a precancerous or "early" malignant neoplasm in an individual with a hereditary predisposition to cancer. Recent advances in molecular diagnostic techniques have improved our understanding of the biologic behavior of these conditions. Predictive testing is an emerging field that attempts to assess the potential risk of cancer development in predisposed individuals. Despite substantial improvement in these forms of testing, all results are imperfect. This information often becomes an important tool that is used by healthcare providers to evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of various risk modifying strategies (i.e., intensive surveillance or preemptive surgery). METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using Medline and the bibliographies of all referenced publications to identify articles relating to preemptive surgery for premalignant foregut lesions. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In this review, we outline the controversies surrounding predictive risk assessment, surveillance strategies, and preemptive surgery in the management of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE), hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC), bile duct cysts, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), and pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Resection of BE is supported by the progressive nature of the disease, the risk of occult carcinoma, and the lethality of esophageal cancer. Prophylactic total gastrectomy for HDGC appears reasonable in the absence of accurate screening tests but must be balanced by the impact of surgical complications and altered quality of life. Surgical resection of biliary cysts theoretically eliminates the exposed epithelium to decrease the lifetime risk of cholangiocarcinoma. Liver transplantation for PSC remains controversial given the scarcity of donor organs and inability to accurately identify high-risk individuals. Given the uncertain natural history of pancreatic cystic neoplasms, the merits of selective versus obligatory resection will continue to be debated. CONCLUSIONS: Preemptive operations require optimal judgment and surgical precision to maximize function and enhance survival. Ultimately, balancing the risk of surgical intervention with less invasive interventions or observation must be individualized on a case-by-case basis.