Practice patterns in the management of arteriovenous fistula stenosis: a northern Italian survey
Abstract
Background: Clinical practice for stenosis detection and treatment in arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) varies widely and is largely dictated by local customs and expertise. Methods: In May 2003, a questionnaire was sent to 32 hemodialysis (HD) facilities in north-eastern Italy, to assess the prevalence of patients with an AVF; the screening criteria for stenosis; the preferred imaging technique; the timing of the intervention and the treatment modality for stenosed and thrombosed AVFs. Results: The response rate was 87%; 2895 prevalent patients were evaluated, 86% with an AVF. All facilities routinely screened for stenosis; the majority relying on clinical assessment (86%), and many on multiple surveillance methods by monitoring dialysis pressures and blood pump flow rate (75-68%), measuring access recirculation (64%), Kt/V (54%) and access blood flow rate (11%). Angiography and Doppler ultrasound were used in equal proportion for imaging. All nephrologists agreed on pre-emptive stenosis correction, 57% taking action on well functioning and 43% on failing AVFs. Forty percent of nephrologists preferred either angioplasty or surgery for pre-emptive stenosis correction, while only 18% used both. Surgery was favored over endovascular techniques (57 vs. 36%) for treating thrombosed AVFs, while only 7% of facilities used both. Conclusions: Our survey shows that, as in 2003, the vast majority of patients in north-eastern Italy were dialyzed with an AVF. Screening for stenosis was universally adopted, though most facilities relied on clinical examination and surrogate access blood flow rate markers. All nephrologists agreed to pre-emptive stenosis correction, and surgery retained a relevant role in the treatment of stenosed and thrombosed AVFs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
All these rates are far lower than the 50%−96% implementation rate reported in a series of international studies.
“All these rates are far lower than the 50%−96% implementation rate reported in a series of international studies (41–43).”
From Construction of nursing-sensitive quality indicators for hemodialysis vascular access: a Delphi study (2026) · cites this paper as [42]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhang, Y., He, L., Tang, S., Gao, Y., Chen, H., Shi, M., & Chen, L. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1858484
- Authors
- Tessitore, N., Bedogna, V., Poli, A., Impedovo, A., Antonucci, F., Teodori, T., Lupo, A., & On behalf of the Triveneto Section of the Italian Society of Nephrology
- Affiliations
- University of Verona (IT)
- Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Feltre - Italy 3
- Ospedale di San Donà di Piave (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Tessitore, Nicola
- Venue
- Journal of Nephrology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-03-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 200-204
- ISSN
- 1121-8428 (ISSN-L)
- 1724-6059
- OpenAlex
- W116828861
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Nephrology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Vascular Procedures and Complications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Renal and Vascular Pathologies
- Keywords
- arteriovenous fistula stenosis, hemodialysis vascular access, angioplasty, AVF thrombosis, Doppler ultrasound, angiography, clinical practice variation
- MeSH terms
- Arteriovenous Fistula, Constriction, Pathologic, Female, Renal Dialysis, Humans, Italy, Male, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Surveys and Questionnaires, Thrombosis, Health Care Surveys
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review