Purpose: We compared the patency and the suitability of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) created for vascular access by two approaches: (a) physical examination with preoperative vascular mapping and (b) physical examination alone.Methods: We compared the patency and the suitability of AVF created in patients for dialysis. There were two cohorts of patients of 79 patients each: (a) patients with AVF created based on the combination of physical examination and preoperative vascular mapping (PE+VM) and (b) patients with AVF created based on physical examination (PE) alone. Fistula patency is defined as clinical detection of thrill (or auscultation) of murmur over the fistula and coded as having thrills (patent) versus not having thrills (not patent). Suitability of fistula is defined as functioning AVF (AVF can be adequately used via 2-needle cannulation for dialysis) and coded as suitable versus not suitable.Results: AVF created after the preoperative vascular mapping (PE+VM) has 5.70 (at six weeks) and 3.76 (at three months) times higher chance for patency, and 3.08 times higher chance for suitable AVF for dialysis than AVF created after the physical examination (PE) alone.Conclusion: Physical examination with preoperative ultrasound mapping (PE+VM) significantly improves the short term patency and the suitability of AVF for dialysis. Keywords: arteriovenous fistula, hemodialysis, ultrasound, sonography, vascular patency