Frequent Hemodialysis Fistula Infectious Complications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined if infectious arteriovenous access complications vary with the cannulation technique and whether this is modified by dialysis frequency. We compared the infection rate between fistulas cannulated using buttonhole versus stepladder techniques for patients treated with short daily (SDH) or nocturnal hemodialysis at home (NHD). We also compared patients receiving conventional intermittent hemodialysis (CIHD) using stepladder cannulation. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from 631 patients dialyzed with a fistula from 2001 to 2010 (Toronto and Ottawa, Canada). We compared the person-time incidence rate of bacteremia and local fistula infections using the exact binomial test. RESULTS: Forty-six (7.3%) patients received SDH (≥5 sessions/week, 2-4 h/session), 128 (20.3%) NHD (≥4 sessions/week, ≥5 h/session) and 457 (72%) CIHD (3 sessions/week, ≤4 h/session). Fifty percent of SDH and 72% of NHD patients used the buttonhole technique. There were 39 buttonhole-related bacteremias (rate: 0.196/1,000 fistula days) and at least 2 local buttonhole site infections. Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 85% of the bacteremias. There were 5 (13%) infection-related hospitalizations and 3 (10%) serious metastatic infections, including fistula loss. In comparison, there was 1 possible fistula-related infection in CIHD during follow-up (rate: 0.002/1,000 fistula days). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of buttonhole-related infections was high among patients on frequent hemodialysis and more than 50 times greater than that among patients on CIHD with the stepladder technique. Most bacteremias were due to S. aureus - with serious consequences. The risks and benefits of buttonhole cannulation require individual consideration with careful monitoring, prophylaxis and management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".