IMPORTANCEVascular access dysfunction is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients requiring hemodialysis. Arteriovenous fistulae are preferred over synthetic grafts and central venous catheters due to superior long-term outcomes and lower health care costs, but increasing their use is limited by early thrombosis and maturation failure. ω-3 Polyunsaturated fatty acids (fish oils) have pleiotropic effects on vascular biology and inflammation and aspirin impairs platelet aggregation, which may reduce access failure. OBJECTIVE To determine whether fish oil supplementation (primary objective) or aspirin use (secondary objective) is effective in reducing arteriovenous fistula failure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe Omega-3 Fatty Acids (Fish Oils) and Aspirin in Vascular Access Outcomes in Renal Disease (FAVOURED) study was a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial that recruited participants with stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease from 2008 to 2014 at 35 dialysis centers in Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Participants were observed for 12 months after arteriovenous fistula creation.INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomly allocated to receive fish oil (4 g/d) or matching placebo. A subset (n = 406) was also randomized to receive aspirin (100 mg/d) or matching placebo. Treatment started 1 day prior to surgery and continued for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was fistula failure, a composite of fistula thrombosis and/or abandonment and/or cannulation failure, at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome. RESULTS Of 1415 eligible participants, 567 were randomized (359 [63%] male, 298 [53%] white, 264 [47%] with diabetes; mean [SD] age, 54.8 [14.3] y). The same proportion of fistula failures occurred in the fish oil and placebo arms (128 of 270 [47%] vs 125 of 266 [47%]; relative risk [RR] adjusted for aspirin use, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86-1.23; P = .78). Fish oil did not reduce fistula thrombosis (60 [22%] vs 61 [23%]; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.72-1.34; P = .90), abandonment (51 [19%] vs 58 [22%]; RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62-1.22; P = .43), or cannulation failure (108 [40%] vs 104 [39%]; RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83-1.26; P = .81). The risk of fistula failure was similar between the aspirin and placebo arms (87 of 194 [45%] vs 83 of 194 [43%]; RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.31; P = .68). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Neither fish oil supplementation nor aspirin use reduced failure of new arteriovenous fistulae within 12 months of surgery.
Background Vascular access outcomes reported across haemodialysis (HD) trials are numerous, heterogeneous and not always relevant to patients and clinicians. This study aimed to identify critically important vascular access outcomes. Method Outcomes derived from a systematic review, multi-disciplinary expert panel and patient input were included in a multilanguage online survey. Participants rated the absolute importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7–9 being critically important). The relative importance was determined by a best–worst scale using multinomial logistic regression. Open text responses were analysed thematically. Results The survey was completed by 873 participants [224 (26%) patients/caregivers and 649 (74%) health professionals] from 58 countries. Vascular access function was considered the most important outcome (mean score 7.8 for patients and caregivers/8.5 for health professionals, with 85%/95% rating it critically important, and top ranked on best–worst scale), followed by infection (mean 7.4/8.2, 79%/92% rating it critically important, second rank on best–worst scale). Health professionals rated all outcomes of equal or higher importance than patients/caregivers, except for aneurysms. We identified six themes: necessity for HD, applicability across vascular access types, frequency and severity of debilitation, minimizing the risk of hospitalization and death, optimizing technical competence and adherence to best practice and direct impact on appearance and lifestyle. Conclusions Vascular access function was the most critically important outcome among patients/caregivers and health professionals. Consistent reporting of this outcome across trials in HD will strengthen their value in supporting vascular access practice and shared decision making in patients requiring HD.
Background. Kidney transplant outcomes of indigenous Australians are poorer compared with nonindigenous Australians, but it is unknown whether the type of acute rejection differs between these patient groups or whether rejection mediates the effect between ethnicity, death-censored graft failure (DCGF), and death with a functioning graft (DWFG). Methods. Biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) rates and types were compared between indigenous and nonindigenous recipients. The associations between ethnicity, BPAR, DCGF, and DWFG were examined using adjusted competing risk analyses, and mediation analysis was conducted to determine whether BPAR mediated the adverse effects between ethnicity and outcomes. Results. Fifty-seven (9.3%) of 616 patients who have received kidney-only transplants between 2000 and 2010 in Western Australia were indigenous. Compared with nonindigenous recipients, BPAR rates were higher in indigenous recipients (42 versus 74 episodes/100 recipients, P < 0.01), with an excess of antibody-mediated rejections. During a median follow-up of 8 years, indigenous recipients were more likely to experience BPAR, DCGF, and DWFG compared with nonindigenous recipients, with adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio of 1.94 (1.39-2.70), 1.53 (0.85-2.76; P = 0.159), and 2.14 (1.13-4.06; P = 0.020), respectively. Although 70% of the effect between ethnicity and DCGF was mediated by BPAR, no similar association was found for DWFG. Conclusions. Indigenous recipients experienced poorer allograft and patient outcomes compared with nonindigenous recipients, with BPAR an important determinant for DCGF. Future research identifying other risk factors and mediators associated with patient survival in indigenous recipients should be considered a priority.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.