HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Robbin, M. L. Articles by Allon, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Robbin, M. L. Articles by Allon, M.

Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula Maturity: US Evaluation¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology (M.L.R., M.E.L.), Division of Transplant Surgery (M.H.G., C.J.Y., M.H.D.), and Division of Nephrology (M.A.), University of Alabama at Birmingham, 619 19th St S, JTN350, Birmingham, AL 35249-6830; and Nephrology Associates, Chattanooga, Tenn (N.E.C.). From the 2001 RSNA scientific assembly. Received August 13, 2001; revision requested October 9; final revision received May 6, 2002; accepted May 14. Address correspondence to M.L.R. (e-mail: mrobbin@uabmc.edu).

View larger version (36K): [in a new window]   Figure 1. Graph shows minimum venous diameter at US as a predictor of fistula adequacy. This test is most accurate for minimum venous diameters between 0.3 and 0.4 cm. Accur = accuracy, Sens = sensitivity; Spec = specificity.

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Figure 2. Graph shows blood flow rate at US as a predictor of fistula adequacy. This test is most accurate for blood flow rates between 400 and 500 mL/min. Accur = accuracy, Sens = sensitivity, Spec = specificity.

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Figure 3. Bar graph shows interaction of minimum venous diameter in centimeters and blood flow rate in milliliters per minute in predicting the likelihood of fistula adequacy for dialysis. If both criteria are met, the positive predictive value is 95%; if neither criterion is met, the negative predictive value is 67%. diam = diameter.

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Figure 4. ROC curve depicts sensitivity versus 1 - specificity for both minimum venous diameter (Min vein diam) and blood flow rate.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Figure 5a. (a) Bar graph shows the effect of timing of postoperative US on minimum venous diameter. The bars are the mean plus or minus SD (P = .65), and the error bars are the SD. The measurements are not significantly different if obtained in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th month after fistula construction, which suggests that measurements obtained at 4-8 weeks can be used to predict fistula outcome. (b) Bar graph shows the effect of timing of postoperative US on blood flow rate. The bars are the mean plus or minus SD (P = .78), and the error bars are the SD. The measurements are not significantly different if obtained in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th month after fistula construction, which suggests that measurements obtained at 4-8 weeks can be used to predict fistula outcome.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Figure 5b. (a) Bar graph shows the effect of timing of postoperative US on minimum venous diameter. The bars are the mean plus or minus SD (P = .65), and the error bars are the SD. The measurements are not significantly different if obtained in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th month after fistula construction, which suggests that measurements obtained at 4-8 weeks can be used to predict fistula outcome. (b) Bar graph shows the effect of timing of postoperative US on blood flow rate. The bars are the mean plus or minus SD (P = .78), and the error bars are the SD. The measurements are not significantly different if obtained in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th month after fistula construction, which suggests that measurements obtained at 4-8 weeks can be used to predict fistula outcome.