Cochrane · systematic review · CD007013
Preoperative vascular access evaluation for haemodialysis patients
Kosa, SD, Al‐Jaishi, AA, Moist, L, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
Kidney and TransplantAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 50%Low 2 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Preoperative vessel imaging by ultrasound mapping versus standard preoperative care for arteriovenous access creation in haemodialysis patients
Population: HD patients with arteriovenous fistulas
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Fistulas created Assessed by surgeon¹ Preoperative vessel imaging by ultrasound mapping vs standard preoperative care | RR 1.02 [0.94, 1.12] | 4 studies · 433 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Fistulas matured Clinical assessment by experienced HD nurse⁴ Preoperative vessel imaging by ultrasound mapping vs standard preoperative care | RR 1.11 [0.98, 1.25] | 3 studies · 356 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Fistulas used for dialysis Clinical assessment by HD nurse Preoperative vessel imaging by ultrasound mapping vs standard preoperative care | RR 1.12 [0.99, 1.28] | 2 studies · 286 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Rate of interventions required to maintain patency (per 1000 patient‐days) Preoperative vessel imaging by ultrasound mapping vs standard preoperative care | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 70 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |