Clinical examination is still the most important diagnostic tool and duplex ultrasonography is the imaging method of first choice. Radiological assessment of vascular access for haemodialysis includes preoperative analysis of vessel anatomy and postoperative surveillance for access maturation as well as diagnosis in vascular access insufficiency. Compared to ultrasonography digital subtraction angiography is superior for the evaluation of the central veins and allows diagnosis and treatment in one session. Computed tomography should only be used in patients with inconclusive ultrasonography results, for example, for the assessment of the central veins and visualization of the vascular tree. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging is no longer recommended in dialysis patients, because it may trigger nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. In patients with a history of previous central venous catheters additional preoperative imaging of the central veins should be performed. In this article we review the different radiological imaging methods for preoperative assessment and suspected vascular access dysfunction.
TordoirJ., CanaudB., HaageP.EBPG on vascular access.Nephrol Dial Transplant.2007; 22: ii88–ii117.
2.
MihmanliI., BesirliK., KurugogluS.Cephalic vein and hemodialysis fistula: surgeon's observation versus color Doppler ultrasonographic findings.J Ultrasound Med.2001; 20: 217–222.
3.
VassalottiJ.A., FalkA., CohlE.D., UribarriJ., TeodorescuV.Obese and non-obese hemodialysis patients have a similar prevalence of functioning arteriovenous fistula using preoperative vein mapping.Clin Nephrol.2002; 58(3): 211–214.
4.
AsifA., CherlaG., MerrillD.Venous mapping using venography and the risk of radiocontrast-induced nephropathy.Semin Dial.2005; 18(3): 239–242.
5.
PrinceM.R., ZhangH.L., ProwdaJ.C., GrossmanM.E., SilversD.N.Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and its impact on abdominal imaging.Radiographics.2009; 29: 1565–1574.
GadallahM.F., PaulsonW.D., VickersB., WorkJ.Accuracy of Doppler ultrasound in diagnosing anatomic stenosis of hemodialysis arteriovenous access as compared with fistulography.Am J Kidney Dis.1998; 32(2): 273–277.
8.
MansourM., KamperL., AltenburgA., HaageP.Radiological central vein treatment in vascular access.J Vasc Access.2008; 9(2): 85–101.
9.
HaageP., VorwerkD., PirothW., SchuermannK., GuentherR.W.Treatment of hemodialysis-related central venous stenosis or occlusion: results of primary Wallstent placement and follow-up in 50 patients.Radiology.1999; 212(1): 175–180.
10.
DuijmL.E.M., LiemY.S., van der RijtR.H.H.Inflow stenoses in dysfunctional hemodialysis access fistulae and grafts.Am J Kidney Dis.2006; 48(1): 98–105.
11.
DuijmL.E.M., van der RijtR.H.H., CuypersP.W.M.Outpatient treatment of arterial inflow stenoses of dysfunctional hemodialysis access fistulas by retrograde venous access puncture and catheterization.J Vasc Surg.2008; 47(3): 591–598.
12.
HeyeS., MaleuxG., MarchalG.J.Upper-extremity venography: CO2 versus iodinated contrast material.Radiology.2006; 241(1): 291–297.
13.
KariyaS., TanigawaN., KojimaH.Efficacy of carbon dioxide for diagnosis and intervention in patients with failing hemodialysis access.Acta Radiol.2010; 51(9): 994–1001.
14.
EhrmanK.O., TaberT.E., GaylordG.M., BrownP.B., HageJ.P.Comparison of diagnostic accuracy with carbon dioxide versus iodinated contrast material in the imaging of hemodialysis access fistulas.J Vasc Interv Radiol.1994; 5(5): 771–775.
15.
Le BlancheA-F, TassartM., DeuxJ-F, RossertJ., BigotJ-M, BoudgheneF.Gadolinium-enhanced digital subtraction angiography of hemodialysis fistulas: a diagnostic and therapeutic approach.AJR Am J Roentgenol.2002; 179(4): 1023–1028.
16.
KaradeliE., TarhanN.C., UluE.M.K.Evaluation of failing hemodialysis fistulas with multidetector CT angiography: comparison of different 3D planes.Eur J Radiol.2009; 69(1): 184–192.
17.
CansuA., SoyturkM., OzturkM.H., KulS., PulathanZ., DincH.Diagnostic value of color Doppler ultrasonography and MDCT angiography in complications of hemodialysis fistulas and grafts.Eur J Radiol.2013; 82(9): 1436–1443.
18.
YeC., MaoZ., RongS.Multi-slice computed tomographic angiography in evaluating dysfunction of the vascular access in hemodialysis patients.Nephron Clin Pract.2006; 104(2): 94–100.
19.
HeyeS., MaleuxG., ClaesK., KuypersD., OyenR.Stenosis detection in native hemodialysis fistulas with MDCT angiography.AJR Am J Roentgenol.2009; 192(4): 1079–1084.
20.
WasinratJ., SiriapisithT., ThamtorawatS., TongdeeT.64-slice MDCT angiography of upper extremity in assessment of native hemodialysis access.Vasc Endovascular Surg.2011; 45(1): 69–77.
21.
KoS-F, HuangC-C, NgS-HMDCT angiography for evaluation of the complete vascular tree of hemodialysis fistulas.AJR Am J Roentgenol.2005; 185(5): 1268–1274.
22.
DimopoulouA., RalandH., WikströmB., MagnussonA.MDCT angiography with 3D image reconstructions in the evaluation of failing arteriovenous fistulas and grafts in hemodialysis patients.Acta Radiol.2011; 52(9): 935–942.
23.
RooijensPPGM, SerafinoG.P., VroegindeweijD.Multislice computed tomographic angiography for stenosis detection in forearm hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulas.J Vasc Access.2008; 9(4): 278–284.
24.
BodeA.S., PlankenR.N., MerkxM.A.G.Feasibility of non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for imaging upper extremity vasculature prior to vascular access creation.Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg.2012; 43(1): 88–94.
25.
PaksoyY., GormusN., TercanM.A.Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (3-D CE-MRA) in the evaluation of hemodialysis access complications, and the condition of central veins in patients who are candidates for hemodialysis access.J Nephrol.2004; 17(1): 57–65.
26.
LaissyJ-P, FernandezP., Karila-CohenP.Upper limb vein anatomy before hemodialysis fistula creation: cross-sectional anatomy using MR venography.Eur Radiol.2003; 13(2): 256–261.
27.
HanK-M, DuijmL.E.M., ThelissenG.R.P.Failing hemodialysis access grafts: evaluation of complete vascular tree with 3D contrast-enhanced MR angiography with high spatial resolution: initial results in 10 patients.Radiology.2003; 227(2): 601–605.
28.
FrogerC.L., DuijmL.E.M., LiemY.S.Stenosis detection with MR angiography and digital subtraction angiography in dysfunctional hemodialysis access fistulas and grafts.Radiology.2005; 234(1): 284–291.
29.
PlankenN.R., TordoirJ.H., DuijmL.E.Magnetic resonance angiographic assessment of upper extremity vessels prior to vascular access surgery: feasibility and accuracy.Eur Radiol.2008; 18(1): 158–167.
30.
PlankenR.N., LeinerT., NijenhuisR.J.Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography findings prior to hemodialysis vascular access creation: a prospective analysis.J Vasc Access.2008; 9(4): 269–277.
31.
MenegazzoD., LaissyJ.P., DürrbachA.Hemodialysis access fistula creation: preoperative assessment with MR venography and comparison with conventional venography.Radiology.1998; 209(3): 723–728.
32.
PlankenR.N., TordoirJ.H.M., DammersR.Stenosis detection in forearm hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulae by multiphase contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: preliminary experience.J Magn Reson Imaging.2003; 17(1): 54–64.
33.
HartnellG.G., HughesL.A., FinnJ.P., LongmaidH.E.III. Magnetic resonance angiography of the central chest veins.A new gold standard? Chest.1995; 107(4): 1053–1057.
34.
BacchiniG., CappelloA., La MiliaV., AndrulliS., LocatelliF.Color doppler ultrasonography imaging to guide transluminal angioplasty of venous stenosis.Kidney Int.2000; 58(4): 1810–1813.
35.
Bode A, Caroli A, Huberts W, et al.; ARCH project consortium.Clinical study protocol for the ARCH project—computational modeling for improvement of outcome after vascular access creation.J Vasc Access.2011; 12(4): 369–376.
36.
HaageP., KringsT., Schmitz-RodeT.Nontraumatic vascular emergencies: imaging and intervention in acute venous occlusion.Eur Radiol.2002; 12(11): 2627–2643.
