Objectives: To assess the feasibility and training effect of simulation training for ultrasound-guided percutaneous arteriovenous fistula (pAVF) creation in a lifelike flow model. Methods: Twenty vascular trainees and specialists were shown an instructional video on creating a pAVF in a dedicated flow model and then randomized to a study or control group. The procedure was divided into five clearly defined steps. Two observers rated the performance on each step, and the time to perform the exercise was recorded. The study group participants underwent supervised hands-on training on the model before performing a second rated pAVF creation. All participants subsequently completed a feedback questionnaire. Results: After supervised simulation training, the study groups participants increased their mean performance rating from 2.2 ± 0.9 to 3.2 ± 0.7. A mean of 3.8 ± 0.8 procedure steps was accomplished independently (control group 2.1 ± 1.4; p < 0.05). The time taken to perform the procedure was 15.6 ± 3.8 min in the study group (control group 27.2 ± 7.3, p < 0.05). The participants with previous experience in ultrasound-guided vascular procedures (n = 5) achieved higher overall mean scores 3.0 ± 0.8 and accomplished more steps without assistance (2.0 ± 1.0) during the simulation training compared to their inexperienced peers (1.5 ± 0.3 and 0.8 ± 0.4, respectively). The feedback questionnaire revealed that the study group participants strongly agreed (n = 7) or agreed (n = 3) that training on the simulation model improved their skills regarding catheter handling. Conclusions: The study group participants increased their overall performance after training on the simulator. More experienced attendees performed better from the beginning, indicating the model to be lifelike and a potential skill assessment tool. Simulation training for pAVF creation using a lifelike model may be an intermediate step between acquiring ultrasound and theoretical pAVF skills and procedure guidance in theatre. However, this type of training is limited by its reliance on the simulator quality, demonstration devices and costs.

Zusammenfassung. Eine einseitige Armschwellung lässt den Betrachter fast automatisch an eine Armvenenthrombose denken. Dieser Artikel soll auf weitere wichtige Differenzialdiagnosen aufmerksam machen. Im vorgestellten Fall handelt es sich um einen Patienten mit symptomatischer arterio-venöser Fistel zwischen der A. und V. subclavia rechts nach Port-a-Cath-Implantation.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate whether the outcome after open aneurysm repair combined with aorto-femoral bypass in patients with concomitant abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD) is inferior to open aneurysm repair for isolated AAA or aorto-femoral bypass for isolated AIOD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality and surgical complications of consecutive patients undergoing elective aneurysm repair, aorto-femoral bypass or a combination of these at two vascular surgery departments from 2003 to 2013. Potential risk factors were investigated by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 511 patients underwent open repair for isolated AAA, 104 aorto-femoral bypass for isolated AIOD and 46 open AAA repair combined with aorto-femoral bypass for concomitant AAA and AIOD. Surgical complications occurred in 17% of AAA, 23% of AIOD and 37% of combined patients (odds ratio [OR] combined vs AAA 2.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43–5.34; p = 0.003). Colon ischaemia occurred in 3.7% of AAA, 2.9% of AIOD and 13% of combined patients (incicidence rate ratio [IRR] combined vs AAA 3.27, 95% CI 1.37–7.81; p = 0.01). The 30-day mortality was 3.1% in AAA, 4.8% in AIOD, and 11% in combined patients (IRR combined vs AAA 3.17, 95% CI 1.26–7.96; p = 0.01). One-year mortality was 5.7% in AAA, 5.8% in AIOD and 15% in combined patients (IRR combined vs AAA 2.50, 95% CI 1.17–5.35; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Combined AAA repair and aorto-femoral bypass has a significantly higher 30-day mortality and postoperative complication rate than isolated AAA repair. Patients with concomitant AAA and AIOD thus represent a high-risk population, which should be considered when deciding on the indication for AAA treatment.