Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To evaluate the outcome of endovascular treatment after surgical treatment for cephalic arch stenosis (CAS) in the brachiocephalic fistula (BCF) and to analyze the factors influencing patency.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing cephalic vein transposition (CVT) or graft interposition (GIP) for CAS from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019. A total of 73 patients with restenosis were included in this study. Patients were classified into cephalic transposition (BCF-CVT) (n = 49) and graft interposition (BCF-GIP) (n = 24) groups. We calculated the postintervention primary and secondary patency of endovascular treatment by using the Kaplan-Meier analysis and analyzed variables associated with loss of postintervention patency.
Results: Six-month and 12-month postintervention primary patency rates of endovascular treatment for restenosis were 56.7% and 15.6% and secondary patency rates were 89.7% and 72.1%, respectively. In the BCF-CVT group, 6-month and 12-month postintervention primary patency was 56.8% and 17.6% and secondary patency was 93.3% and 79.4%, respectively. In the BCF-GIP group, 6-month and 12-month postintervention primary patency was 56.5% and 8.7% and secondary patency was 85.7% and 56.3%, respectively. There was no significant difference in postintervention primary patency between the two groups (P = .79). However, the BCF-CVT group demonstrated higher postintervention secondary patency (P = .034). The BCF-GIP group had a higher number of stenosis sites (P < .01). There was no significant predictor of reduced postintervention primary patency. The only adverse variable of postintervention secondary patency was BCF-GIP (hazard ratio, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.06-9.34; P < .05).
Conclusions: Endovascular treatment is still the acceptable option for stenosis occurring after surgical treatment for CAS. CVT provides higher postintervention secondary patency than GIP.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.01.001 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!