Maturation and Patency Rates in Basilic Transposition Arteriovenous Fistula Under Regional Versus General Anesthesia: A Single-Center, Retrospective, Observational Study

Background Basilic transposition arteriovenous fistula (BT AVF) is a viable option for dialysis-dependent patients, which can be performed under either general or regional anesthesia. Regional anesthesia is reported to cause vascular dilatation during the perioperative period, leading to improved fistula success. Regional anesthesia is also considered safe as compared to general anesthesia in terms of hemodynamic stability. Limited and conflicting data are available comparing regional versus general anesthesia in terms of fistula maturation and patency. We aimed to compare the maturation, one-year patency rates, and complication rates in patients undergoing single-stage BT AVF in regional versus general anesthesia. Methods This retrospective observational study was conducted on patients undergoing single-stage BT AVF from January 2016 to December 2019. Patients were divided into regional (RA) vs. general anesthesia (GA) groups and compared in terms of maturation, one-year patency, and perioperative complication rates. Results Out of 152 patients, 110 (72.37%) were in GA while 42 (27.63%) were in the RA group. Elderly, female, diabetic, ischemic heart disease, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class IV patients were more in the RA group. Other comorbid and vascular access-related factors were comparable between the groups. A trend toward higher maturation rates (97.6% vs. 92.1%) and one-year patency rates (62.5% vs. 56.6%) was observed in the RA vs. GA group, however, the difference did not attain statistical significance, p=0.359 and p=0.327, respectively. The rate of access abandonment was higher in the GA group (43.4% vs. 37.5%). The most prevalent cause of abandonment was death in the RA group while it was access failure in the GA group. Overall complication rates were comparable between both groups (20.2 % vs. 17.5%, p=0.816). Conclusion Regional anesthesia is a useful technique with potentially improved maturation and patency rates. Nevertheless, an assumed benefit of regional anesthesia in terms of anesthesia-related complications was not observed.