Comorbidities Do not Influence Primary Fistula Success in Incident Hemodialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Concern about primary fistula failure may contribute to the underuse of arteriovenous fistula. The objective of this study was to investigate the baseline clinical parameters associated with primary fistula success. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Consecutive incident patients who commenced dialysis during a 28-mo period in a regional renal program were studied. Data on patient-related variables and on surgical approach (e.g., whether the surgeons routinely assess vessel size during the operation) were collected. Primary fistula success was defined as an arteriovenous fistula that was able to afford successful dialysis for 3 h with blood pump speed of > or =300 ml/min for three consecutive sessions. RESULTS: A total of 205 (69%) patients had an AVF attempted as their first vascular access. The overall primary success rate was 64% and was similar for radiocephalic and brachiocephalic fistula. Logistic regression was done separately for patients with the two types of fistula because of the presence of statistical interaction. For radiocephalic fistula, male gender was the only parameter associated with primary fistula success (odds ratio 3.57; P = 0.01). The presence of comorbidity was not significantly associated with primary fistula failure. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant patient comorbidity, there was a high primary fistula success rate among this incident hemodialysis cohort. Given that vessel size may be the ultimate determinant of fistula success, if surgeons assess vessel size perioperatively, then the presence of significant comorbidity might not preclude arteriovenous fistula from being attempted as the initial access.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".