Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on November 17, 2005
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2006 21(2):254-257; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfi276
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/2/254    most recent
gfi276v2
gfi276v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Unger, P.
Right arrow Articles by Wissing, K. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Unger, P.
Right arrow Articles by Wissing, K. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2005]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org


Editorial Comment

Arteriovenous fistula after renal transplantation: utility, futility or threat?

Philippe Unger1 and Karl Martin Wissing2

1 Department of Cardiology and 2 Department of Nephrology, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Philippe Unger, MD, Department of Cardiology, Erasme Hospital, 808 route de Lennik, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium. Email: punger{at}ulb.ac.be

Keywords: arteriovenous fistulas; left ventricular morphology; renal transplantation



   Introduction
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Creation of an arteriovenous (AV) fistula for haemodialysis therapy provides convenient access to the circulation in patients with end-stage renal disease. However, the chronic volume overload induced by the AV fistula induces structural and functional cardiac changes, including left ventricular remodelling, which may be deleterious. The balance between the need for vascular access and the deleterious effects of a patent AV fistula on cardiac function and morphology obviously favours the former in patients requiring long-term haemodialysis. After renal transplantation, however, the value of keeping an AV fistula patent is more uncertain and whether it should be closed after successful renal transplantation remains a matter of debate. Since recent studies have provided more insight into the cardiac and haemodynamic changes induced by the procedure, this review aims to summarize the pros and cons of AV fistula closure.



   Determinants of left ventricular morphology after renal transplantation
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Left ventricular hypertrophy is highly prevalent among patients with end-stage renal disease [1]. Hypertension and chronic anaemia appear to be the main stimuli for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy in dialysis patients, although age, diabetes and metabolic factors may also play a role. Left ventricular dilatation is also frequent and is associated with anaemia, hypertension, hypoalbuminaemia, ischaemic heart disease and plasma volume expansion [2]. In addition, left ventricular adaptation to the chronic volume overload induced by AV fistulas is characterized by increased stroke volume and cardiac output and by left ventricular enlargement; the resulting left ventricular hypertrophy is predominantly eccentric (i.e. characterized by increased left ventricular mass with normal relative wall thickness) [2,3]. Renal transplantation improves left ventricular volume, paralleling the correction of uraemia and volume status, the normalization of the haemoglobin level and the rise in serum albumin and may reduce left ventricular hypertrophy [4,5]. However, the prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy remains high, with uncontrolled hypertension and anaemia as main contributing factors. Strict blood pressure control contributes to the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy [6]. The effect of a patent AV fistula on left ventricular morphology after renal transplantation had received little attention until recent data suggested a significant contribution to residual hypertrophy [7–11].



   Deleterious effects of AV fistulas
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Complications of AV fistulas are not uncommon and include steal syndrome, arm oedema, thrombosis and, rarely, traumatic bleeding. Furthermore, patients frequently consider the presence of a dilated and pulsatile fistula as non-aesthetic. In addition to local complications, a haemodynamically significant role of the fistula is supported by numerous case reports showing high output cardiac failure subsiding after AV fistula closure. Obviously, these reports involved patients with large AV fistulas and it is difficult to extrapolate the detrimental effects of AV fistulas to larger samples of patients with smaller AV access. Even when heart failure is not evident, the creation of an AV fistula stimulates brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) release in response to myocardial tension and increased intravascular volume [12], an interesting observation in light of the fact that raised BNP may predict survival even in patients with asymptomatic heart failure [13]. In addition, AV fistula creation may adversely affect the balance between cardiac oxygen supply and demand [14] and may predispose to a risk of myocardial ischaemia by reducing subendocardial perfusion [15]. Creation of an AV fistula increases left ventricular volume [12,16] and left ventricular mass is higher in transplanted patients when there is a patent AV fistula [11]. As in patients with hypertension, left ventricular mass is an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease [17] and after renal transplantation [18,19]. In uraemic patients with left ventricular dilatation, normal systolic function and a low mass-to-volume ratio, a condition that is a hallmark of volume overload and the presence of an AV fistula, the clinical outcome may be more dependent on the degree of LV dilatation than the degree of hypertrophy [5].



   Rationale for AV fistula closure
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Several prospective studies have shown an early decrease in left ventricular volume and mass after AV fistula closure [7,9], although these studies involved a rather limited number of selected patients with large and mainly symptomatic fistulas. A 6.4–8.6% decrease in left ventricular mass was found 1 month after AV fistula closure [9,10], reaching 11.1% and 15.8% at 3–4 and 21 months, respectively [7,10]. Not all patients responded to surgical closure to a similar degree and the increase in total peripheral resistance and in blood pressure during an acute compression best predicted left ventricular diameter and mass reduction [9].

Left ventricular mass reduction of a similar magnitude during antihypertensive treatment is associated with a marked reduction in risk for subsequent cardiovascular disease in hypertensive patients [20]. But will the reduced left ventricular hypertrophy associated with fistula closure translate into a similar cardiovascular risk reduction? There are currently no data allowing this extrapolation, as this would require a large population sample. Moreover, after adjustment for left ventricular mass, hypertensive patients with the eccentric left ventricular hypertrophy pattern, which is frequently found in patients with large AV fistulas (Figure 1), have been show to experience a lower incidence of cardiovascular events compared with those patients with concentric hypertrophy (that is, increased left ventricular mass and relative wall thickness) [21]. Furthermore, in hypertensive patients, the concentric pattern, which is also the predominant geometry after AV fistula closure (Figure 1) [10], has been shown to confer a risk significantly higher than that conferred by normal left ventricular geometry [21]. Thus, beyond the net reduction in left ventricular mass, the expected beneficial effects of AV fistula closure may be hampered by the lack of normalization of left ventricular morphology. In addition to the effects on left ventricular morphology, patients often report exercise tolerance improvement (unpublished data), but this should be investigated further.


Figure 1
View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Left ventricular morphology at baseline (left panel) and a median of 16 months after surgical AV fistula closure (right panel). Patients are divided into four groups according to left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and relative wall thickness [RWT = (septal + posterior wall thickness)/left ventricular end diastolic diameter]: normal left ventricular geometry (lower left case); concentric remodelling (lower right case); eccentric hypertrophy (upper left case); and concentric hypertrophy (upper right case). At baseline, both concentric and eccentric hypertrophy patterns are predominant, whereas after surgical ligation of the AV access, left ventricular morphology fails to normalize and the concentric remodelling pattern is the most prevalent. Adapted from [10].

 


   Which patients should be considered for surgical closure?
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Should the renal graft deteriorate and graft loss occur, a return to haemodialysis therapy would require creation of a new vascular access, and ligation of an AV fistula carries the obvious disadvantage of destroying a functioning vascular access. The ideal patient for fistula closure should, therefore, have a minimal risk of graft failure that would ultimately require a new functional AV fistula and should expect significant long-term benefits from fistula closure. Hence, fistula closure should be restricted to patients with good graft function and without significant proteinuria, no history of severe or multiple acute rejection episodes and no signs of recurrence of the primary kidney disease in the graft. In our centre, 41 renal transplant patients (20 male and 21 female) underwent surgical closure of a patent AV fistula between September 1999 and April 2004. The fistula was closed a median of 2.1 years (range: 0.7–16.5 years) after transplantation and the mean age at fistula closure was 50.2±13.9 years. During a median follow-up of 45.8 months (range: 4.6–73 months), three patients returned to dialysis because of chronic allograft nephropathy and one patient died of heart failure. The overall actuarial graft survival was 84% and the death-censored graft survival was 87.9% (Figure 2). A new AV fistula could be created in all three patients who needed to resume haemodialysis. Our experience suggests that medium-term graft loss is low in carefully selected renal transplant patients and that surgical closure of an AV fistula does not seem to preclude the creation of a new vascular access should the patient need to restart dialysis. However, this low incidence of renal graft loss is likely to increase with a longer follow-up period. Furthermore, peripheral vascular status should be included in the decision analysis, to avoid closure of a vascular access in patients who have few suitable veins remaining.


Figure 2
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Death-censored graft survival after closure of the AV fistula in 41 renal transplant patients. Censored observations are indicated as vertical lines on the survival plot.

 


   Conclusions
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 
AV fistula closure reduces left ventricular volume and mass in renal transplant patients. Whether fistula closure will reduce the associated high cardiac morbidity and mortality is unknown. There are clearly insufficient data yet to promote systematic closure of AV fistulas in kidney transplant patients with stable renal function, unless symptoms are present. The balance might favour closure in selected asymptomatic patients, with a large AV fistula, a dilated left ventricle, a low probability of graft loss and a high risk of cardiac events. Randomized large-scale prospective studies are clearly needed and, potentially, will better define the protective role of fistula closure.



   Acknowledgments
 
P.U. has received a grant from the Fonds pour la Chirurgie Cardiaque.

Conflict of interest statement. None declared.



   References
 Top
 Introduction
 Determinants of left ventricular...
 Deleterious effects of AV...
 Rationale for AV fistula...
 Which patients should be...
 Conclusions
 References
 

  1. Harnett JD, Kent GM, Barre PE, Taylor R, Parfrey PS. Risk factors for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy in a prospectively followed cohort of dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 1994; 4: 1486–1490[Abstract]
  2. Alpert MA. Cardiac performance and morphology in end-stage renal disease. Am J Med Sci 2003; 325: 168–178[Medline]
  3. Meeus F, Kourilsky O, Guerin AP, Gaudry C, Marchais SJ, London GM. Pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int Suppl 2000; 76: S140–S147[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Himelman RB, Landzberg JS, Simonson JS et al. Cardiac consequences of renal transplantation: changes in left ventricular morphology and function. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988; 4: 915–923
  5. Parfrey PS, Harnett JD, Foley RN et al. Impact of renal transplantation on uremic cardiomyopathy. Transplantation 1995; 60: 908–914[Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Rizzoni D, Castellano M, Donato F, Agabiti-Rosei E. Association of change in left ventricular mass with prognosis during long-term antihypertensive treatment. J Hypertens 1995; 13: 1091–1095[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  7. van Duijnhoven ECM, Cheriex ECM, Tordoir JHM, Kooman JP, van Hooff JP. Effects of closure of arteriovenous fistula on left ventricular dimensions in renal transplant patients. Nephrol Dial transplant 2001; 16: 368–372[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. El-Husseini AA, Sheashaa HA, Hassan NA, El-Demerdash FM, Sobh MA, Ghoneim MA. Echocardiographic changes and risk factors for left ventricular hypertrophy in children and adolescents after renal transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 2004; 8: 249–254[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Unger P, Wissing KM, de Pauw L, Neubauer J, van de Borne P. Reduction of left ventricular diameter and mass after surgical arteriovenous fistula closure in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2002; 74: 73–79[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. Unger P, Velez-Roa S, Wissing KM, Hoang AD, van de Borne P. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy after arteriovenous fistula closure in renal transplant recipients: a long-term follow-up. Am J Transpl 2004; 4: 2038–2044[CrossRef]
  11. Frank H, Schmieder RE, Vogt-Ladner G, Schobel HP, Neumayer HH. Determinants of left ventricular structure after kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc 2000; 32: 2801–2806[Medline]
  12. Iwashima Y, Horio T, Takami Y et al. Effects of the creation of arteriovenous fistula for hemodialysis on cardiac function and natriuretic peptide levels in CRF. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40: 974–982[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Doust JA, Pietrzak E, Dobson A, Glasziou P. How well does B-type natriuretic peptide predict death and cardiac events in patients with heart failure: systematic review. Br Med J 2005; 330: 625–633[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Bos WJW, Zietse R, Wesseling KH, Westerhof N. Effects of arteriovenous fistulas on cardiac oxygen supply and demand. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 2049–2053[Medline]
  15. Savage MT, Ferro CJ, Sassano A, Tomson CRV. The impact of arteriovenous fistula on central hemodynamic pressures in chronic renal failure patients: a prospective study. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 40: 753–759[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Ori Y, Korzets A, Katz M, Perek Y, Zahavi I, Gafter U. Haemodialysis arteriovenous access: a prospective haemodynamic evaluation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996; 11: 94–97[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Shlipak MG, Fried LF, Cushman M et al. Cardiovascular mortality risk in chronic kidney disease: comparison of traditional and novel risk factors. JAMA 2005; 293: 1737–1745[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. McGregor E, Jardine AG, Murray LS et al. Pre-operative echocardiographic abnormalities and adverse outcome following renal transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13: 1499–1505[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Rigatto C, Foley R, Jeffery J, Negrijn C, Tribula C, Parfrey P. Electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in renal transplant recipients: prognostic value and impact of blood pressure and anemia. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14: 462–468[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Verdecchia P, Angeli F, Borgioni C et al. Changes in cardiovascular risk by reduction of left ventricular mass in hypertension: a meta-analysis. Am J Hypertens 2003; 16: 895–899[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Muiesan ML, Salvetti M, Monteduro C et al. Left ventricular concentric geometry during treatment adversely affects cardiovascular prognosis in hypertensive patients. Hypertension 2004; 43: 731–738[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Received for publication: 27. 9.05
Accepted in revised form: 25.10.05


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
W. Lam, D. Betal, M. Morsy, and E. S. Chemla
Enormous brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula aneurysm after renal transplantation: case report and review of the literature
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2009; 24(11): 3542 - 3544.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/2/254    most recent
gfi276v2
gfi276v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Unger, P.
Right arrow Articles by Wissing, K. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Unger, P.
Right arrow Articles by Wissing, K. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?