Keywords
Blood purification
Chronic renal failure
Quality of life
Submitted : 2023-11-28
Accepted : 2023-12-13
Published : 2023-12-28
Abstract
Objective: To observe the effects of blood purification treatment and assess the prognostic impact of different vascular pathways on patients with chronic renal failure (CRF). Methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical data was conducted on 68 CRF cases, categorizing them based on their choice of blood purification vascular access. Group A received an autologous arteriovenous fistula, Group B received an internal jugular vein tunneled polyester sleeve catheter, and Group C received a polytetrafluoroethylene graft vascular fistula. Clinically relevant observation indicators, complication rates, and quality of life scores among the three groups were compared. Results: No significant differences were found between the three groups regarding observed values of clinically relevant indicators and quality of life scores (P > 0.05). When comparing thromboembolism rates Group A had the highest rate, followed by Group C and Group B; for infection rate comparison, Group C had the highest rate, followed by Group B and Group A (P < 0.05). Conclusion: In comparison with the other two vascular access methods, although autologous arteriovenous fistula poses a higher risk of thromboembolism, it exhibits a lower infection rate. Therefore, it is recommended as the preferred vascular access form for blood purification in patients with CRF. If this approach is unavailable, careful consideration should be given. The use of an internal jugular vein with a tunneled polyester sleeve catheter is suggested to better ensure the effectiveness and safety of the patient’s treatment.
References
Hu C, Zhang H, Jin J, et al., 2021, Retrospective Cohort Study on the Impact of Different Types of Long-Term Vascular Access on the Prognosis of Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients. Journal of Nephrology and Dialysis and Kidney Transplantation, 30(6): 525–529.
Quan J, Cai D, Ren Y, et al., 2021, Observation of Dialysis Adequacy and Complication Rate When Different Vascular Accesses are Used in Hemodialysis. Guizhou Medicine, 45(10): 1579–1580.
Ge J, Xu Y, 2013, Internal Medicine, 8th Edition, People’s Medical Publishing House, Beijing, 459–462.
Vascular Access Working Group of the Blood Purification Center Branch of the Chinese Hospital Association, 2019, Chinese Expert Consensus on Vascular Access for Hemodialysis (2nd Edition). Chinese Blood Purification, 18(6): 365–381.
Li AH, Chen R, et al., 2022, Research on the Impact of Different Vascular Access Types on the Survival of Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients. Chinese Blood Purification, 21(9): 681–685.
Li W, 2023, Observation on the Clinical Effects of Blood Purification Through Different Vascular Pathways in Treating Patients with Chronic Renal Failure. Journal of Contemporary Clinical Medicine, 36(1): 67–68.
Li S, 2019, Observation on the Effect of Blood Purification Treatment on 146 Cases of Renal Failure with Different Vascular Access. Journal of Shanxi Workers’ Medical College, 29(1): 38–40.
Jiang L, Wang Y, 2020, Effects of Different Vascular Accesses on Uremic Patients Undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis. Journal of Practical Clinical Medicine, 24(18): 81–84.
Liu H, Huang Y, Lei M, 2021, Analysis of the Effectiveness of Establishing Different Vascular Access Blood Purification Treatments in Patients with Renal Failure and Its Significance in Reducing Complications. Clinical Medical Research and Practice, 6(1): 45–47.
Yu Q, 2021, Analysis of the Therapeutic Effect of Different Vascular Access Blood Purification on Patients with Renal Failure. Medical Frontiers, 11(26): 60–62.