Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

Patency of tertiary vascular access in hemodialysis patients: case series

  • Raymen Satria ,
  • I Wayan Sudarma ,
  • I Nyoman Semadi ,


Background: Transposed brachio-basilic arteriovenous fistula (TBB-AVF) or arteriovenous graft (AVG) can be considered when primary and secondary vascular access options have been exhausted. Evidence that compared both procedures remains scarce. We aimed to report and describe the effectiveness of TBB-AVF and AVG as tertiary vascular access, reviewing literature about the advantages of each procedure.

Case Presentation: We presented a series of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients needing tertiary vascular access to compare each procedure's effectiveness. Our study included 17 patients with ESRD and multiple vascular access failures who needed tertiary vascular access for hemodialysis between January 2019 and August 2022. Patency in 6 months and 1 year were compared between TBB-AVF and AVG using the Kaplan-Meier curve. The early failure rate was 14.4% for TBB-AVF and 87.5% for AVG. TBB-AVF had a better patency rate than AVG (p=0.005; log-rank). Cumulative patency rates in six months and one year were 91.7% and 85.7% for TBB-AVF compared to 87.5% and 16.7% for AVG, respectively.

Conclusion: The creation of TBB-AVF should only be suggested if primary and secondary vascular access options have been exhausted. The TBB-AVF was more effective in functional patency than AVG as tertiary vascular access.


  1. Lok CE, Huber T, Lee T, et al. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update. American Journal of Kidney Diseases. 2020; 75(4):S1-S164.
  2. Chue KM, Thant KZ, Luo HD, Soh YHR, Ho P. Comprehensive comparison of the performance of autogenous brachial-basilic transposition arteriovenous fistula and prosthetic forearm loop arteriovenous graft in a multiethnic Asian hemodialysis population. BioMed Res Int. 2016; 2016:8693278.
  3. Chemla ES, Morsy MA. Is basilic vein transposition a real alternative to an arteriovenous bypass graft? A prospective study. Semin Dial. 2008; 21:352-6.
  4. Kukita K, Ohira S, Amano I, et al. 2011 update Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy guidelines of vascular access construction and repair for chronic hemodialysis. Ther Apher Dial. 2015; 19(1):1-39.
  5. Davoudi M, Tayebi P, Beheshtian A. Primary patency time of basilic vein transposition versus prosthetic brachioaxillary access grafts in hemodialysis patients. J Vasc Access. 2013; 14:111-5.
  6. Lioupis C, Mistry H, Rix T, Chandak P, Tyrrell M, Valenti D. Comparison among transposed brachiobasilic, brachiobrachial arteriovenous fistulas and Flixene™ vascular graft. J Vasc Access. 2011, 12:36-44.
  7. Basel H, Ekim H, Odabasi D, Kiymaz A, Aydin C, Dostbil A. Basilic vein transposition fistulas versus prosthetic bridge grafts in patients with endstage renal failure. Ann Vasc Surg. 2011; 25:634-9.
  8. Mehra K, Manikandan R, Dorairajan LN. Outcomes of Transposition of Brachiobasilic Arteriovenous Fistula in Two-Stage Technique: A Single-Centre Experience With Literature Review. Cureus. 2020;12(8):e9949.
  9. Marques G, Sadaghianloo N, Fouilhé L, et al. Higher Patency of Transposed Brachio-Basilic Arteriovenous Fistulas Compared to Brachio-Axillary Grafts for Hemodialysis Patients. The Journal of Vascular Access. 2015; 16(6):486-92.
  10. Lazarides M, Georgiadis G, Papasideris C, Trellopoulos G, Tzilalis V. Transposed brachial-basilic arteriovenous fistulas versus prosthetic upper limb grafts: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2008; 36(5):597-601.
  11. Vrakas G, Defigueiredo F, Turner S, Jones C, Taylor J, Calder F. A comparison of the outcomes of one-stage and two-stage brachiobasilic arteriovenous fistulas. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2013; 58(5):1300-4
  12. Ozcan S, Gür AK, Yener AU, Odabasi D. Comparison of one- and two-stage basilic vein transposition for arterio-venous fistula formation in haemodialysis patients: preliminary results. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2013; 24:364-8.
  13. Bashar K, Healy DA, Elsheikh S, et al. One-stage vs. two-stage brachio-basilic arteriovenous fistula for dialysis access: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2015;10: e0120154.
  14. Deguchi J, Sato O. Transposed Brachial–Basilic Arteriovenous Fistula for Vascular Access in Japan. Annals of Vascular Diseases. 2018; 11(2):181-90.
  15. Ghaffarian AA, Griffin CL, Kraiss LW, Sarfati MR, Brooke BS. Comparative effectiveness of one-stage versus two-stage basilic vein transposition arteriovenous fistulas. J Vasc Surg. 2017; 67(2):529-35.
  16. Field M, Van Dellen D, Mak D. The Brachiobasilic Arteriovenous Fistula: Effect of Patient Variables. The Journal of Vascular Access. 2011; 12(4):325–30.
  17. Sgroi MD, Patel MS, Wilson SE, Jennings WC, Blebea J, Huber TS. The optimal initial choice for permanent arteriovenous hemodialysis access. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2013; 58(2):539–48.
  18. Drouven J, de Bruin C, van Roon A, Oldenziel J, Zeebregts C. Outcomes of basilic vein transposition versus polytetrafluoroethylene forearm loop graft as tertiary vascular access. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2019; 69(4):1180-6.

How to Cite

Satria, R., Sudarma, I. W. ., & Semadi, I. N. . (2023). Patency of tertiary vascular access in hemodialysis patients: case series. Intisari Sains Medis, 14(1), 258–261.




Search Panel