Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of the transjugular approach with those of the conventional approach for endovascular treatment of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs). METHODS: Between May 2015 and July 2019, 112 patients with endovascular treatment of dysfunctional or immature AVFs were included and divided into the transjugular (n = 46) and conventional (n = 66) groups. Electronic medical records and angiography of the patients were retrospectively reviewed to assess technical and clinical success rates, time to first fistulography, total procedure time, primary and secondary patency, and complications in both groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in technical success rate (87.0% vs 97.0%; P = .062), clinical success rate (80.4% vs 90.9%; P = .109), or total procedure time (60.2 vs 57.9 min; P = .670) between the groups. Cox proportional hazards models showed that the cumulative primary patency was significantly higher in the transjugular group than in the conventional group (P = .041; 6-month patency rates, 93.8% vs 91.5%). Also, a statistically significant difference was found between the cumulative secondary patency of the groups (P = .014; 6-month patency rates, 91.4% vs 86.5%). No major complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Transjugular endovascular treatment of AVFs was successful and effective. Longer patency periods were observed when treated via transjugular access. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This article compared the outcomes of transjugular approaches with those of conventional approaches in the endovascular treatment of native AVFs and showed higher patency periods/rates in the transjugular group than in the conventional group.