Clinical Study
Efficacy of SMART Stent Placement for Salvage Angioplasty in Hemodialysis Patients with Recurrent Vascular Access Stenosis
Table 4
Summary of recent reports of outcome using metallic stents. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month patency rates were 77–88%, 51–67%, and 20–41%, respectively.
| Investigators | Year | | Study design | Stent type | AVF or AVG | Primary patency (%) | (months) | 3 M | 6 M | 12 M | |
| Vogel and Parise [12] | 2004 | 53 | Retrospective | SMART | AVG | 77 (61–93) | 51 (34–67) | 20 (12–27) | mean 8.9 | Vogel and Parise [14] | 2005 | 25 | Prospective, Non-randomized | SMART | AVG | 88 (75–100) | 67 (48–86) | 41 (21–61) | mean 8.2 | Pan et al. [21] | 2005 | 12 | Retrospective | Wallstent, Jostent | AVF | 92 ± 8 | 81 ± 12 | 31 ± 17 | n/a | Liang et al. [22] | 2006 | 23 | Observational | Wallstent, nitinol | AVG | 69 ± 9 | 41 ± 10 | 30 ± 10 | n/a | Maya and Allon [23] | 2006 | 14 | Prospective, Non-randomized | Wallstent, SMART, Protégé, Fluency | AVG | 48 | 19 | n/a | median 2.8 | Chan, M.R. et al. [24] | 2008 | 211 | Retrospective | SMART | AVG | 69 | 25 | n/a | median 4.4 | Current study | 2011 | 50 | Prospective, Observational | SMART | Both | 79 ± 9 | 51 ± 15 | 27 ± 16 | median 3.8 | | | 25 | | | AVF | 80 ± 10 | 65 ± 16 | 32 ± 21 | median 5.2 | | | 25 | | | AVG | 76 ± 15 | 28 ± 22 | 19 ± 17 | median 2.9 |
|
|