Comparison of catheters or new arteriovenous fistulas for commencement of haemodialysis in pregnant women with chronic kidney disease: an international observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence surrounding vascular access options for commencing dialysis in pregnancy complicated by chronic kidney disease (CKD) is limited. Creation of new arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) in pregnant women is rare. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of approaches to vascular access in pregnancy in centres in Australia, the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada (2002-2018). RESULTS: Twenty-three women with advanced CKD commenced dialysis in pregnancy (n = 20) or planned to commence (n = 3). Access at dialysis start was a tunnelled catheter (n = 13), temporary catheter (n = 1), AVF created pre-conception but used in pregnancy (n = 3) and AVF created during pregnancy (n = 3). No women commencing dialysis with an AVF required a catheter. No differences in perinatal outcomes were observed comparing AVFs and catheters at dialysis commencement. No AVFs were created in pregnancy in Canadian women. From Australia and the UK, 10 women had a new AVF created in pregnancy, at median gestation 14.5 weeks (IQR 12.5, 20.75). Four women still needed a catheter for dialysis initiation and 3 eventually used the new AVF. Six AVFs were successfully used in pregnancy at median gestation 24 weeks (IQR 22.5, 28.5), 2 were successfully created but not used and 2 had primary failure. No catheter-associated complications were identified except one episode of catheter-related sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter-related complications were minimal. In selected women, with sufficient pre-planning, an AVF can be created and successfully used during pregnancy to minimise catheter use if preferred. Pre-conception counselling in advanced CKD should include discussing vascular access options reflecting local expertise and patient preferences.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".