English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  We investigated the impact of a transvenous cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) placement on outcomes and arteriovenous vascular access (VA) patency among chronic hemodialysis patients.    Methods  This is a single-center, observational comparative study between chronic hemodialysis patients with ipsilateral and contralateral CIED and VA. Forty-two consecutive patients who underwent both CIED placement and upper-extremity VA for hemodialysis, regardless of the sequence and time interval between these 2 procedures, were identified between January 2001 and December 2017. Patients with ipsilateral ( n  = 22, 52%, the ipsilateral group) and contralateral ( n  = 20, 48%, the contralateral group) CIED and VA were compared retrospectively; the primary outcome was any-cause mortality and cardiac mortality or the composite of any systemic complications, defined as central venous stenosis or occlusion, any device infections or tricuspid regurgitation; the secondary outcome was CIED or VA malfunction.    Results  During the median follow-up period of 101 months, primary outcome incidence was significantly higher in the ipsilateral group than the contralateral group (73% vs 40%,  P  = 0.03), although the incidences of any-cause mortality ( P  = 0.28) and cardiac mortality ( P  > 0.99) were similar between the groups. Secondary outcome incidence did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (55% vs 30%,  P  = 0.36). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed similar primary and secondary VA patency rates in both groups. On subgroup analysis, patients with upper arm VA had similar primary and secondary patency to those with forearm VA.    Conclusions  Despite some notable limitations of the study, the retrospective study design and small sample size, we found that the any-cause mortality incidence and VA patency did not differ between the 2 groups, but primary outcome incidence was significantly higher among patients with ipsilateral CIED and VA.

Impact of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices in chronic hemodialysis patients: a single-center, observational comparative study