Non-surgical interventions to control bleeding from arteriovenous fistulas and grafts inside and outside the hemodialysis unit: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Prolonged bleeding from arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) and arteriovenous grafts (AVG) associates with worse outcomes; Within the hemodialysis unit these outcomes include anemia and quality of life disruptions, and outside the hemodialysis unit includes fatal hemorrhage. However, various guidelines for AVF/AVG bleeding management inside and outside the hemodialysis unit lack consensus. Methods: A scoping review was conducted of four databases, from inception to 17 February 2024. The study population was hemodialysis patients experiencing bleeding from AVF or AVG. Studies that assessed non-operative management were included. Results: < .05), respectively. Use of chitosan-based dressings decreased percentage of patients bleeding 4-min post-cannulation by 16.3%-39.2%. One pilot observational study demonstrated no access thromboses or infections with short-term use of a compression device within the hemodialysis unit. However, the role of compression devices and tourniquets within the dialysis unit remains unclear, despite widespread use. Long-term AVF/AVG survival was not reported in any study. Limited research confirms that devices are effective in prevention of catastrophic out-of-hospital bleeding. It remains uncertain if device availability enhances patient confidence in managing out-of-hospital bleeding. This may impact patient choices around dialysis modality, access and transplant, but this remains uncertain. Conclusions: In hemodialysis patents with bleeding from AVF/AVG, several alternative dressings or devices decrease post-cannulation bleeding time within the hemodialysis unit. Existing research has not established criteria on when it might be appropriate to use specialized dressings. There is very limited research on methods to control bleeding from AVF/AVG outside the hemodialysis unit. More data are required before evidence-based guidelines can be made. Recommendations for future research are provided.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".