• Medicine · Jul 2022

    Meta Analysis

    Effect of buttonhole cannulation versus rope-ladder cannulation in hemodialysis patients with vascular access: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized/clinical controlled trials.

    • Li-Ping Wang, Li-Hwa Tsai, Hisang-Yun Huang, Chizimuzo Okoli, and Su-Er Guo.
    • Department of Nursing, Chi Mei Medical Center, Chiali, Tainan City, Taiwan, R.O.C.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Jul 22; 101 (29): e29597e29597.

    BackgroundSafe and effective arteriovenous fistula (AVF) puncture techniques must be used to reduce harm to hemodialysis patients. The relative benefits of buttonhole (BH) cannulation over those of rope ladder (RL) cannulation for AVF remain unclear and inconsistent.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Literature searches were conducted in June 2020 in multiple scientific databases including Cochrane library, CINAHL, PubMed/ Medline, Airiti Library, National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan, Google scholar, Embase, and ProQuest. We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials (CCTs) that explored the efficacy of BH cannulation in hemodialysis patients. These included reports published in either English or Chinese that enrolled adults aged 18 years or older who underwent hemodialysis using an autogenous AVF. Studies that showed poor design, such as use of a self-control group or no control group, were excluded from analysis. The critical appraisal skills program checklist for RCTs were used to assess the quality of the evidence and RevMan software were used to perform the meta-analysis.ResultsFifteen studies (11 RCTs and 4 CCTs) met the inclusion criteria and were used for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that BH cannulation significantly reduced aneurysm formation (RR = 0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.1, 0.32]), stenosis (RR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.25, 0.77]), thrombosis formation (RR = 0.4, 95% CI [0.2, 0.8]), and hematoma (RR = 0.63, 95% CI [0.40, 0.99]) and showed no differences in AVR infection (≦6 months, RR = 2.17, 95% CI [0.76, 6.23]; >6 months, RR = 2.7, 95% CI [0.92, 7.92]) compared to RL cannulation.ConclusionsGiven the benefits of BH, this meta-analysis found that BH cannulation should be recommended as a routine procedure for hemodialysis but that hospitals and hemodialysis clinics should strengthen staff knowledge and skills of BH cannulation to reduce the risk of AVF infection.Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…