Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jan;7(1):45-7.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Central Venous Stenosis among Prevalent Hemodialysis Patients, a Single Center Experience

Affiliations
  • PMID: 24702535

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Central Venous Stenosis among Prevalent Hemodialysis Patients, a Single Center Experience

Osama O Osman et al. Arab J Nephrol Transplant. 2014 Jan.

Abstract

Introduction: Central vein stenosis (CVS) is a common complication of central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. In this study we evaluated the prevalence and risk factors of CVS among hemodialysis (HD) patients in a single center in Sudan, using Doppler ultrasound as a screening tool.

Methods: The study included 106 prevalent HD patients. For every patient, we performed Duplex Doppler for the right and left jugular, subclavian and femoral veins. A patient was considered to have hemodynamically significant stenosis if the pre-stenosis to the post-stenosis velocities ratio was ≥ 2.5 or they had complete vein occlusion.

Results: Overall, 28.3% of patients had Doppler detected CVS, including 25.5% with hemodynamically significant stenosis and 2.8% with compromised flow. The prevalence of CVS was 68.4% among symptomatic patients compared to 19.5% in asymptomatic patients. The prevalence of CVS among patients with history of 0-1, 2-3 and ≥ 4 central venous catheters was 3.4%, 29.4% and 53.8% respectively (p=0.00). CVS was not more common in patients with history of previous/current jugular or femoral vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in these veins (28.3% vs 28.6% and 35% vs 26.7% respectively; p >0.1). However, CVS was significantly more common in patients with previous/ current subclavian vein catheterization compared to no catheter placement in this vein (47.8% vs 22.9%, p = 0.02).

Conclusion: CVS is highly prevalent among studied HD patients, particularly in the presence of suggestive clinical signs. The number of HD catheter placements and subclavian vein utilization for dialysis access impose a significantly higher risk of CVS.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources