Neointimal Hyperplasia, Dialysis Access Malfunction
Conditions
Brief summary
Arteriovenous Fistula (AVF) is a surgically created circuit used for hemodialysis in patient with End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD). A functioning dialysis vascular access is critical to the delivery of life-saving hemodialysis (HD) treatment for these patients. Unfortunately, neointimal hyperplasia frequently occurs within the dialysis vascular access, resulting in stenosis, poor flow and thrombosis with loss of function. The cephalic vein forms the outflow conduit for radiocephalic (RC) and brachiocephalic (BC) AVF. At the perpendicular portion of the cephalic vein, the cephalic arch is often prone to developing hemodynamically significant stenosis. The prevalence of cephalic arch stenosis is reported to be 39% in brachiocepahlic and 2% in radiocephalic AVF. The current gold standard therapy for treatment of AVF stenosis is plain balloon angioplasty (BA). Paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty has also been shown recently to be superior to plain BA in the treatment of stenosis in dialysis vascular access. By releasing paclitaxel, which is an anti-proliferation drug, locally into the vessel wall during balloon contact, it will blunt the acceleration of intimal hyperplasia response, resulting in improved primary patency after angioplasty. The use of stent grafts for recurrent CAS has been demonstrated to increase patency of AVF compared to BA and bare stents. However, stent grafts are prone to edge restenosis that tend to occur within 5mm of each end of SG due to neointimal hyperplasia from the end of the stent migrating towards the center. We postulate that stent graft with PCB angioplasty of the stent edge is more effective than PCB alone in maintaining the patency of AVF with cephalic arch stenosis. Therefore, we aim to perform a randomized controlled trial to compare the 6-month unassisted patency rate of treatment of recurrent CAS with stent graft and PCB angioplasty of both stent edge versus PCB alone.
Interventions
CAS treated with PCB only
DEVICEPaclitaxel Coated Balloon and Stent Graft
CAS treated with PCB first before deployment of stent graft
Sponsors
Singapore General Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age 21 - 90 years * Patients who requires balloon angioplasty for dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula, can be de novo lesions or recurrent CAS stenosis within six months of interventions. Suitability will be determined with a baseline ultrasound assessment. * Matured AVF, defined as being in use for at least 1 month prior to angioplasty * Successful angioplasty of the underlying stenosis, defined as less than 30% residual stenosis on Digital Subtraction Angiography (DSA).
Exclusion criteria
* Patient unable to provide informed consent * Thrombosed or partially thrombosed AVF * Immature AVF * Insignificant CAS defined as \<50% stenosis and no clinical indicator such as high V pressure. * Presence of central vein stenosis with more than 30% residual stenosis post-angioplasty * Patient who had underwent stent placement within the CAS previously * Patients who are allergic to both aspirin or clopidogrel * Patient who are currently enrolled in other drug eluting balloon trials * Sepsis or active infection * Recent intracranial bleed or gastrointestinal bleed within the past 12 months. * Allergy to iodinated contrast media, heparin or paclitaxel * Pregnancy
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Patency of Target Lesion (Cepahlic Arch) | 6-months post-op | Freedom from any re-intervention at target lesion that is clinically driven or indicated on surveillance scan |
| Primary Patency of Access Circuit | 6-months post-op | Percentage of patients who do not need to undergo another re-intervention at the dialysis access circuit |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Assisted Primary Patency of Target Lesion | 3 and 12 months post-op | Percentage of patients who do not need to undergo another thrombolysis or thrombectomy at target lesion. |
| Assisted Primary Patency of Access Circuit | 3 and 12 months post-op | Percentage of patients who do not need to undergo another thrombolysis or thrombectomy at dialysis access circuit |
| Secondary Patency | 3 and 12 months post-op | Percentage of patients who will not need creation of a new AVF or an alternative dialysis access site. |
| Time taken to next intervention | 12-months post-op | — |
| Primary Patency of Target Lesion | 3 and 12 months post-op | Percentage of patients who do not need to undergo another re-intervention at the target lesion |
| Number of repeat interventions to maintain access circuit | 6 and 12 months post-op | — |
| Rate of late lumen loss of the cephalic arch, proximal and distal stent edge | 12 months post-op | — |
| Complication Rate | 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post-op | — |
| Number of repeat interventions to target lesion | 6 and 12 months post-op | — |
| Primary Patency of Access Circuit | 3 and 12 months post-op | Freedom from any re-intervention that is clinically driven or indicated on surveillance scan |
Countries
Australia, Singapore
Contacts
Primary ContactCharyl Yap
Outcome results
None listed