Con: Buttonhole cannulation of arteriovenous fistulae

Abstract

Successful cannulation of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) using a safe and effective technique that minimizes patient harm is a crucial aspect of haemodialysis treatment. Although the current standard of care for many years has been the rope-ladder technique (using sharp needles to cannulate rotating sites across the entire AVF), a number of enthusiasts have recently advocated for the alternative method of buttonhole cannulation (using blunt needles to repeatedly cannulate the same site via a healed track) on the basis of putative, as yet unproven benefits. In this article, we review all available observational studies, randomized controlled trials, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have compared the clinical outcomes of buttonhole and rope-ladder cannulation of AVFs. These studies clearly and consistently demonstrated that buttonhole cannulation causes significant and serious infectious harm to haemodialysis patients, especially in the home setting. No strategies or treatments have been proven to effectively mitigate this hazard of buttonhole cannulation. Moreover, buttonhole cannulation is associated with a higher rate of abandonment and has not been shown to have any proven benefit compared with the rope-ladder method. Specifically, buttonhole cannulation has not been shown to reduce cannulation-related pain, improve vascular access survival, reduce vascular access interventions, reduce haematoma formation, improve haemostasis or reduce aneurysm formation. Consequently, rope-ladder cannulation should remain the standard of care and buttonhole cannulation should only be used in rare circumstances (e.g. short segment AVFs where the only alternative is a haemodialysis catheter).

Keywords: arteriovenous fistula; dialysis; end-stage renal disease; haemodialysis; sepsis.