Looking at AVflo™ also with economical glasses
A new study initiated in New-Delhi will take a look at 100 AVflo™ implanted patients not only from the usual clinical angle but will also try to tackle some economic aspects of the “graft vs. fistula” issue.
A native fistula is considered today to be the “gold standard” for access creation for dialysis patients. In addition to long patency times and low complication rates a fistula seems less expensive than a graft, since “the patient brings his vessels with him” avoiding the need to invest resources in buying a graft. The world economic crisis is urging all “players” to save on resources and economize medicine wherever possible.
Many researchers worldwide point out, that most of the created fistulae never mature, thus exposing the patient to further access attempts (more costs!) while maintaining dialysis over a central venous catheter (CVC). CVC is associated with high infection rates which need to be treated IV (stationary) with expensive antibiotics. So far, economic studies were concentrated upon the direct costs associated with buying a graft or creating a “mo-material-investment” fistula.
We hope that the study will contribute to our understanding of cost-factors associated with access surgery and include positions like access-associated hospitalization, consumption of access-associated medications, transportation, loss of work-days etc. We postulate, that using a Rapid-Access graft, avoiding long waiting and maturation times associated with AV-Fistulae and regular grafts is not only clinically important, saving the patient a CVC implantation to “bridge” the time gap between creation of an access and its readiness for use, but also economically beneficial.