Joaquín Vallespín

El acceso vascular para hemodiálisis es esencial para el enfermo renal tanto por su morbimortalidad asociada como por su repercusión en la calidad de vida. El proceso que va desde la creación y mantenimiento del acceso vascular hasta el tratamiento de sus complicaciones constituye un reto para la toma de decisiones debido a la complejidad de la patología existente y a la diversidad de especialidades involucradas. Con el fin de conseguir un abordaje consensuado, el Grupo Español Multidisciplinar del Acceso Vascular (GEMAV), que incluye expertos de las cinco sociedades científicas implicadas (nefrología [S.E.N.], cirugía vascular [SEACV], radiología vascular e intervencionista [SERAM-SERVEI], enfermedades infecciosas [SEIMC] y enfermería nefrológica [SEDEN]), con el soporte metodológico del Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, ha realizado una actualización de la Guía del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis publicada en 2005. Esta guía mantiene una estructura similar, revisando la evidencia sin renunciar a la vertiente docente, pero se aportan como novedades, por un lado, la metodología en su elaboración, siguiendo las directrices del sistema GRADE con el objetivo de traducir esta revisión sistemática de la evidencia en recomendaciones que faciliten la toma de decisiones en la práctica clínica habitual y, por otro, el establecimiento de indicadores de calidad que permitan monitorizar la calidad asistencial. Vascular access for haemodialysis is key in renal patients both due to its associated morbidity and mortality and due to its impact on quality of life. The process, from the creation and maintenance of vascular access to the treatment of its complications, represents a challenge when it comes to decision-making, due to the complexity of the existing disease and the diversity of the specialities involved. With a view to finding a common approach, the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology [S.E.N.], vascular surgery [SEACV], vascular and interventional radiology [SERAM-SERVEI], infectious diseases [SEIMC] and nephrology nursing [SEDEN]), along with the methodological support of the Cochrane Center, has updated the Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis, published in 2005. These guidelines maintain a similar structure, in that they review the evidence without compromising the educational aspects. However, on one hand, they provide an update to methodology development following the guidelines of the GRADE system in order to translate this systematic review of evidence into recommendations that facilitate decision-making in routine clinical practice, and, on the other hand, the guidelines establish quality indicators which make it possible to monitor the quality of healthcare.

Vascular access for haemodialysis is key in renal patients both due to its associated morbidity and mortality and due to its impact on quality of life. The process, from the creation and maintenance of vascular access to the treatment of its complications, represents a challenge to decision-making, because of the complexity of the existing disease and the diversity of the specialities involved. With a view to finding a common approach, the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology [S.E.N.], vascular surgery [SEACV], vascular and interventional radiology [SERAM-SERVEI], infectious diseases [SEIMC] and nephrology nursing [SEDEN]), along with the methodological support of the Cochrane Center, has updated the Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis, published in 2005. These guidelines maintain a similar structure, in that they review the evidence without compromising the educational aspects. However, on the one hand, they provide an update to methodology development following the guidelines of the GRADE system in order to translate this systematic review of evidence into recommendations that facilitate decision-making in routine clinical practice, and, on the other hand, the guidelines establish quality indicators which make it possible to monitor the quality of healthcare. © 2017 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0). Guía Clínica Española del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis El acceso vascular para hemodiálisis es esencial para el enfermo renal tanto por su morbimortalidad asociada como por su repercusión en la calidad de vida. El proceso que va desde la creación y mantenimiento del acceso vascular hasta el tratamiento de sus complicaciones constituye un reto para la toma de decisiones debido a la complejidad de la patología existente y a la diversidad de especialidades involucradas. Con el fin de conseguir un abordaje consensuado, el Grupo Español Multidisciplinar del Acceso Vascular (GEMAV), que incluye expertos de las cinco sociedades científicas implicadas (nefrología [S.E.N.], cirugía vascular [SEACV], radiología vascular e intervencionista [SERAM-SERVEI], enfermedades infecciosas [SEIMC] y enfermería nefrológica [SEDEN]), con el soporte metodológico del Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, ha realizado una actualización de la Guía del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis publicada en 2005. Esta guía mantiene una estructura similar, revisando la evidencia sin renunciar a la vertiente docente, pero se aportan como novedades, por un lado, la metodología en su elaboración, siguiendo las directrices del sistema GRADE con el objetivo de traducir esta revisión sistemática de la evidencia en recomendaciones que faciliten la toma de decisiones en la práctica clínica habitual y, por otro, el establecimiento de indicadores de calidad que permitan monitorizar la calidad asistencial. © 2017 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. Este es un artículo Open Access bajo la licencia CC BY-NC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

The Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology (S.E.N.), vascular surgery (SEACV), interventional radiology (SERAM-SERVEI), infectious diseases (SEIMC), and nephrology nursing (SEDEN)), along with the methodological support of the Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, has developed the Spanish Clinical Guidelines on Vascular Access for Hemodialysis. This article summarizes the main issues from the guideline's chapter entitled "Monitoring and surveillance of arteriovenous access." We will analyze the current evidence on conflicting topics such as the value of the flow-based screening methods for the arteriovenous access surveillance or the role of Doppler ultrasound as the imaging exploration to confirm suspected stenosis. In addition, the concept of significant stenosis and the criteria to perform the elective intervention for stenosis were reviewed. The adoption of these guidelines will hopefully translate into a reduced risk of thrombosis and increased patency rates for both arteriovenous fistulas and grafts.

BACKGROUND: Native arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is considered the gold standard of vascular access for hemodialysis due to its longer survival, fewer complications, lower mortality and costs. Patency is important for effective dialysis treatment and this remains a challenge in nephrology. There are no well-defined prognostic factors for early and long-term AVF survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate comorbidity, analytical and ultrasound (US) variables as prognostic factors for early failure and AVF patency. METHODS: A prospective single-center cohort study was conducted with 5 years of follow-up. Inclusion criteria were patients with new native AVF creation between January 2011 and December 2015 and known vascular access survival data at the end of follow-up. Comorbidity (blood pressure, severe arteriopathy, diabetes, Charlson Index), and laboratory data (hemoglobin, calcium, phosphorus, PTH, ferritin, C-reactive protein), as well as US preoperative mapping (morphology and hemodynamic), were collected. End-points were early failure and secondary patency by Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS: The study included 117 patients with native AVF. Median age was 69±18 years and mainly of male gender (N.=70, 59.8%). Hypertension, diabetes and severe vascular disease were present in 65 (86.7%), 38 (50.7%) and 31 (41.3%). In 55 patients (47.8%) the AVF was in a distal location. Early failure was 19.7% and secondary patency at 5 years was 66.7%. Elderly age (P=0.034) and vein diameter (P=0.041) had an impact on early AVF failure. Radial (P=0.006) and ulnar peak systolic velocity (PSV) (P=0.018) showed predictive value in native AVF secondary patency rate. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of early and late events are slightly different. Elderly age and vein diameter had greater impact on early AVF failure. However, distal arterial hemodynamics showed prognostic value in native AVF secondary patency rate.