Next Article in Journal
Cardiac Troponins as Biomarkers of Cardiac Myocytes Damage in Case of Arterial Hypertension: From Pathological Mechanisms to Predictive Significance
Previous Article in Journal
Variation in Phenolic Profile, Antioxidant, and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Salvadora oleoides Decene. and Salvadora persica L. Fruits and Aerial Part Extracts
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Markers, the Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Measured Vessels’ Diameters in Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation Failure

by
Réka Kaller
1,2,†,
Emil Marian Arbănași
1,†,
Adrian Vasile Mureșan
1,3,*,
Septimiu Voidăzan
4,
Eliza Mihaela Arbănași
5,
Emőke Horváth
6,
Bogdan Andrei Suciu
3,7,
Ioan Hosu
8,
Ioana Halmaciu
7,
Klara Brinzaniuc
7 and
Eliza Russu
1,3
1
Clinic of Vascular Surgery, Mureș County Emergency Hospital, 540136 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
2
Doctoral School of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
3
Department of Surgery, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
4
Department of Epidemiology, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
5
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540139 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
6
Department of Pathology, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540142 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
7
Department of Anatomy, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology “George Emil Palade” of Târgu-Mureș, 540142 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
8
Department of Nephrology, Mures County Emergency Hospital, 540136 Târgu-Mureș, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors have contributed equally to this work.
Life 2022, 12(9), 1447; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091447
Submission received: 15 July 2022 / Revised: 12 September 2022 / Accepted: 16 September 2022 / Published: 18 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Medical Research)

Abstract

:
Background: An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the first-line vascular access pathway for patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In planning vascular access, it is necessary to check the diameters of the venous and arterial components for satisfactory long-term results. Furthermore, the mechanism underlying the maturation failure and short-term patency in cases of AVFs is not fully known. This study aims to verify the predictive role of inflammatory biomarkers (the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), and C-reactive protein (CRP)), Ca-P product, the prognostic nutritional index (PNI), and the diameters of the venous and arterial components in the failure of AVF maturation. Methods: The present study was designed as an observational, analytical, and retrospective cohort study with a longitudinal follow-up, and included all patients with a diagnosis of ESRD that were admitted to the Vascular Surgery Clinic of the Targu Mures Emergency County Hospital, Romania, between January 2019 and December 2021. Results: The maturation of AVF at 6 weeks was clearly lower in cases of patients in the high-NLR (31.88% vs. 91.36%; p < 0.0001), high-PLR (46.94% vs. 85.55%; p < 0.0001), high-SII (44.28% vs. 88.89%; p < 0.0001), high-CRP (46.30% vs. 88.73%; p < 0.0001), high-Ca-P product (40.43% vs. 88.46%; p < 0.0001), and low-PNI (34.78% vs. 91.14%; p < 0.0001) groups, as well as in patients with a lower radial artery (RA) diameter (40% vs. 94.87%; p = 0.0009), cephalic vein (CV) diameter (44.82% vs. 97.14%; p = 0.0001) for a radio-cephalic AVF (RC-AVF), and brachial artery (BA) diameter (30.43% vs. 89.47%; p < 0.0001) in addition to CV diameter (40% vs. 94.59%; p < 0.0001) for a brachio-cephalic AVF (BC-AVF), respectively. There was also a significant increase in early thrombosis and short-time mortality in the same patients. A multivariate analysis showed that a baseline value for the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, and PNI was an independent predictor of adverse outcomes for all of the recruited patients. Furthermore, for all patients, a high baseline value for vessel diameter was a protective factor against any negative events during the study period, except for RA diameter in mortality (p = 0.16). Conclusion: Our findings concluded that higher NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, and PNI values determined preoperatively were strongly predictive of AVF maturation failure, early thrombosis, and short-time mortality. Moreover, a lower baseline value for vessel diameter was strongly predictive of AVF maturation failure and early thrombosis.

1. Introduction

An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the first-line vascular access pathway for patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), with a lower rate of complications and superior patency compared to an arteriovenous graft (AVG) and a central venous dialysis catheter (CVC) [1,2,3,4,5]. For efficient hemodialysis, the vascular access path must be optimal, ensuring a minimum flow of 300 mL/min, being cannulated with two needles, and presenting prolonged patency [6,7].
Although an AVF is the vascular access pathway recommended by the European Society of Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guide [6] to be used, an AVF must be matured. Regarding maturation, an AVF must ensure a sufficient lumen and flow at the level of the venous component to be located superficially for easy and efficient cannulation [8,9,10]. Another important factor in the long-term quality of vascular access is the time of performing an AVF; patients who are prepared for vascular access in terms of time report a higher rate of maturation with better long-term results [11] compared to those who occur late and require the initiation of hemodialysis at the level of a CVC until the maturation of an AVF [12,13,14].
In planning vascular access, it is necessary to check the diameters of the venous and arterial components for satisfactory long-term results. Thus, the ESVS guidelines recommend a minimum diameter of 2 mm for both components for a radio-cephalic AVF (RC-AVF) and a minimum diameter of 3 mm for both components to create a brachio-cephalic AVF (BC-AVF) [6].
The mechanism underlying the maturation failure and short-term patency in cases of AVFs is not fully known. The link between systemic inflammation and short-term AVF failure has been recently studied [15,16,17,18,19]. Among the recently most studied inflammatory markers in the literature, we mention the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) as having predictive roles in the negative evolution of patients with a cardiovascular pathology [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28] and patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), respectively [17,18,29,30,31,32,33]. Another typical inflammatory marker is the systemic inflammatory index (SII), which predicts mortality and poor oncological pathology outcomes [34,35,36].
Nutritional evaluations, in conjunction with systemic inflammatory biomarkers, provide valuable information on the status of ESKD patients. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is a simple instrument derived from serum albumin levels and the total lymphocyte count, which represents the condition of systemic inflammation and protein synthesis deficiency in the status of ESKD [37]. Recent studies have shown that this marker can predict the unfavorable progression of individuals with renal disease [38,39,40] as well as the risk of early postoperative renal failure in oncological patients [41,42].
This study aims to verify the predictive role of inflammatory biomarkers (the NLR, PLR, SII, and CRP), Ca-P product, the PNI, and the diameters of venous and arterial components in the failure of AVF maturation.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

The present study was designed as an observational, analytical, and retrospective cohort study with a longitudinal follow-up. It included all patients with a diagnosis of ESRD that were admitted to the Vascular Surgery Clinic of the Târgu-Mureș Emergency County Hospital, Romania, between January 2019 and December 2021. The exclusion criteria were as follows: ESRD patients who had already had an AVF, an active tumoral status, sepsis, hematological diseases, a personal history of a major surgery in the previous six months, and autoimmune diseases.
Patients included in the study were initially divided into groups depending on their poor AVF maturation status at 6 weeks: “Maturation” and “Non-Maturation”. An ideal cut-off value for the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameters versus maturation was used to calculate each patient’s six-week early thrombosis rate and mortality rate.

2.2. Data Collection

The patients’ demographic data were extracted from the hospital’s electronic database. We searched for the following comorbidities in the medical history: arterial hypertension (AH), atrial fibrillation (AF), chronic heart failure (CHF), ischemic heart disease (IHD), myocardial infarction (MI), type 2 diabetes (T2D), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), tobacco use, and obesity.

2.3. Preoperative Workup and AVF Technique

Physical and Doppler ultrasound exams as well as blood tests (hemoglobin, hematocrit, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, monocyte count, platelet count, glucose level, cholesterol, and triglyceride level) were conducted before surgery. The NLR, PLR, SII, Ca-P product, and PNI were calculated using the equations below:
NLR = total   number   of   neutrophils total   number   of   lymphocytes
PLR = total   number   of   platelets total   number   of   lymphocytes
SII = total   number   of   neutrophils × total   number   of   platelets total   number   of   lymphocytes
Ca-P Product = calcium level (mg/dL) × phosphorous level (md/dL)
PNI = [10 × serum albumin (g/dL)] + [0.005 × total number of lymphocytes]
RC-AVFs and BC-AVFs were created. First, clinically palpable pulses were checked, followed by an ultrasonography examination. The first option was always an RC-AVF. If any of the active component’s diameter was lower than 1.7 mm, a vein had thrombosis stigmata, or an artery appeared heavily calcified, a decision was made to choose the cubital fossa site as the recipient for a BC-AVF.

2.4. AVF Maturation

A clinical examination was undertaken for the initial AVF, and the presence of a palpable thrill at the level of the anastomosis was examined for the proper length along the path of the vein, which must be located rather superficially and can be punctured with two needles. An auscultatory continuous audible bruit was registered. Subsequently, the “rule of 6” was verified by ultrasonography, meaning a vein with a minimum diameter of 6 mm, at a maximum depth of 6 mm, and with a minimum flow of 600 mL/min [6].

2.5. Study Outcomes

The primary endpoints were the six-week maturation rate, early thrombosis, and mortality. The secondary endpoint was the overall maturation rate after a single assisted maturation intervention. The primary outcomes were stratified for the optimal NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameter cut-off value at baseline, and overall outcomes were stratified by AVF type.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

SPSS for Mac OS version 28.0.1.0 was used for the statistical analysis (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Chi-square tests were used to assess the associations of the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameters with category factors, while Student’s t-tests or Mann–Whitney U tests were used to assess differences in the continuous variables. To assess the predictive power and establish cut-off NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameter values, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was utilized. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was utilized to determine the appropriate NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameter cut-off values based on Youden’s index (Youden’s index = Sensitivity + Specificity1, ranging from 0 to 1). To identify independent predictors of maturation, early thrombosis, and mortality, a multivariate logistic regression analysis using variables with p < 0.1 was undertaken.

3. Results

During the studied period, 125 patients with predialysis ESRD were admitted for an AVF procedure. Of the patients, 76 were male (60.80%) and the mean age was 61.64 ± 13.81 (21–84). As for the performed surgical procedures, an RC-AVF was chosen in 64 cases (51.2%) and a BC-AVF was chosen in 61 cases (48.8%). In the first 6 weeks, 22 AVFs suffered early thrombosis and 10 patients died. The 22 thrombosed AVFs were surgically revised as follows: a successful thrombectomy was performed on 16, while the other 6 patients required an additional enlargement angioplasty using bovine pericardium at the anastomosis level to achieve a palpable thrill. Of these patients, 13 reached maturation in the end, while 9 required the performance of a novel AVF. The rest of the comorbidities and laboratory data are presented in Table 1.
Patients whose AVFs failed to mature during the first 6 weeks were older patients (p = 0.03). Additionally, in terms of comorbidities, patients in the Non-Maturation group had higher incidences of both CHF (p = 0.0004) and T2D (p = 0.0001). Regarding the laboratory findings, patients in the Non-Maturation group had higher neutrophil (p < 0.0001), serum phosphorous (p < 0.0001), Ca-P product (p < 0.0001), CRP (p < 0.0001), NLR (p < 0.0001), PLR (p < 0.0001), and SII (p < 0.0001) values as well as lower lymphocyte (p < 0.0001), serum albumin (p < 0.0001), serum calcium (p < 0.0001), and PNI (p < 0.0001) values. Regarding vessel diameter, in the Non-Maturation group lower vessel diameters were found for both for RC-AVFs (radial artery (p < 0.0001), cephalic vein (p < 0.0001)) and BC-AVFs (brachial artery (p < 0.0001), cephalic vein (p < 0.0001)). Moreover, there were higher incidences of early thrombosis (p = 0.0001) and mortality (p = 0.008) (Table 1).
The statistics show no significant differences in terms of six-week maturation, early thrombosis, and mortality in the two types of AVF, as seen in Table 2. However, the overall maturation rate was higher in the BC-AVF group (95.08% vs. 79.68%; p = 0.01).
ROC curves for the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, and vessel diameters were created to determine whether the baselines of these biomarkers were predictive of non-maturation, early thrombosis, and mortality in all of the patients (Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3). The optimal cut-offs, obtained from Youden’s index, the areas under the curve (AUCs), and the predictive accuracies of the ratios and vessel diameters are listed in Table 3.
Depending on the optimal cut-off value according to the ROC, the outcomes were further analyzed after dividing the patients into paired groups, as seen in Table 4.
There was a higher incidence in all of the outcomes studied in the high-ratio inflammatory markers and Ca-P product groups, and a lower incidence for all of the outcomes evaluated in the high-PNI and high-vessel-diameter group, except for the RA diameter in regard to mortality in RC-AVFs (p = 0.10).
The multivariate analysis showed that a baseline value of NLR > 4.90 predicts AVF maturation failure (OR: 22.65; 95% CI: 8.32–61.67; p < 0.001) and early thrombosis (OR: 9.57; 95% CI: 3.21–28.45; p < 0.001), whereas an NLR > 5.83 predicts short-term mortality (OR: 19.0; 95% CI: 3.75–96.27; p < 0.001). Furthermore, a PLR > 172.29 value is a predictor of maturation failure (OR: 6.68; 95% CI: 2.85–15.63; p < 0.001), a PLR > 181.72 is a predictor of early thrombosis (OR: 6.80; 95% CI: 2.42–19.09; p < 0.001), and a PLR > 212.89 is an independent predictor of short-term mortality (OR: 16.9; 95% CI: 3.35–85.24; p < 0.001). A preoperative value of SII > 954.54 is also a predictor of maturation failure (OR: 9.66; 95% CI: 3.88–24.07; p < 0.001), an SII > 859.22 is a predictor of early thrombosis (OR: 7.08; 95% CI: 2.23–22.46; p < 0.001), and an SII > 949.71 is an independent predictor of short-term mortality (OR: 14.0; 95% CI: 1.71–114.28; p = 0.01). Additionally, high values of CRP and Ca-P product are negative prognostic factors for all of the recorded outcomes (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.003/p = 0.01). High PNI levels, on the other hand, are protective factors against adverse events (p < 0.0001). Moreover, the presence of CHF and T2D was an independent predictor for non-maturation and early thrombosis. Furthermore, for all patients, a high baseline value for vessel diameter was a protective factor against any negative event during the studied period, except for the RA diameter in mortality (p = 0.16) (Table 5).

4. Discussion

This research included 125 patients with predialysis ESRD. These patients had 64 RC-AVF and 61 BC-AVF procedures performed. The predictive role of systemic inflammatory markers such as the NLR, PLR, and SII, as well as the diameter of the venous and arterial components regarding the six-week maturation of AVFs, were studied. The study’s most important findings emphasize the predictive role of inflammatory indicators and the importance of vascular diameter for AVF maturation failure.
Numerous studies have examined the relationship between systemic inflammation and AVF failure [43,44,45]. Among the biomarkers studied with a role in predicting AVF thrombosis and maturation failure, we list interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and C-reactive protein (CRP) [46,47,48,49].
Similar to this study, Yaprak et al. found that high NLR (HR: 2.72; 95% CI: 1.05–7.02; p = 0.03) and PLR (HR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.11–7.38; p = 0.03) values are associated with all causes of mortality, but only the PLR (HR: 4.41; 95% CI: 1.37–14.17; p = 0.01) is an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis [49]. Moreover, Wongmahisorn demonstrated that high values, both preoperative (OR: 5.46; 95% CI: 3.15–9.48) and postoperative (OR: 7.19; 95% CI: 4.12–12.5), of the NLR are an associated factor for early AVF failure [17].
In a paper published by Zhu et al., which analyzed the association of high NLR and PLR values with balloon post-angioplasty restenosis in AVF stenosis in a group of 114 patients, a PLR > 187.86 before intervention has been associated with post-angioplasty restenosis [50]. The prognostic relevance of NLR and PLR in chronic renal disease has been described in various articles in the literature [51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61].
In terms of vessel diameter, there are mixed results in the literature. Numerous pieces of research have established and affirmed the predictive function of arterial and venous components’ diameters in long-term fistula maturation and survival [62,63,64]; however, some investigations have not found a well-defined connection between arterial diameter and the maturation as well as patency of AVFs [65,66,67].
Therefore, in a comprehensive study, Kordzaev et al. revealed that a minimum diameter of 2 mm for the radial artery and the cephalic vein in conducting an RC-AVF is ideal for long-term development and usefulness [62]. Furthermore, Mendez et al. observed that with a venous diameter of 2 mm they had 16% successful maturation of AVFs, compared to 76% effective maturation in patients with a venous component diameter > 2 mm [63].
In their brief research, Parmar et al. reported that in a group of 21 patients a radial artery diameter greater than 1.5 mm was related to 100% patency at 12 weeks postoperatively (p < 0.01) [64]. Wong et al. discovered no difference in the diameter of the venous component between groups with matured AVFs and those with non-matured AVFs [65]. In a paper published by Wlimink et al., which included 803 patients with AVFs, the authors reported that vessel diameter is a weak predictor of AVF functionality [66]. In another 96-patient prospective piece of research, Zadeh et al. discovered no statistical relevance between vessel diameter and AVF maturation [67].
According to the findings of Barutcu Atas et al., a baseline value of PNI < 39 was correlated with mortality in a retrospective study on 359 patients over the age of 80 with CKD stage 3–4 [68]. Furthermore, in a group of 1988 patients with stable coronary arteries, Wada et al. established the involvement of the PNI in the development of significant adverse cardiac events [69].
In terms of inflammatory markers, NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, and Ca-P product values over the baseline are independent predictors of maturation failure, early thrombosis, and short-term mortality, as seen in Table 5, according to the multivariate analysis. Additionally, a high baseline value of the PNI was a protective factor for any negative events during the studied period.
Regarding RC-AVFs, a diameter of RA > 2.25 mm is a protection factor against maturation failure (p < 0.001), and an RA > 2.35 mm is a protection factor against early thrombosis (p = 0.009) but not against short-term mortality (p = 0.16). Additionally, a CV diameter > 2.55 mm is a protection factor against maturation failure (p < 0.001), a CV > 2.35 mm is a protection factor against early thrombosis (p = 0.004), and a CV > 2.15 mm is a protection factor against short-term mortality (p = 0.04).
Regarding BC-AVFs, a BA diameter > 2.95 mm is a protection factor against maturation failure (p < 0.001) as well as early thrombosis (p = 0.01), and a BA > 2.70 mm is a protection factor against short-term mortality (p = 0.02). Additionally, a CV diameter > 2.70 mm is a protection factor against maturation failure (p < 0.001) and early thrombosis (p = 0.001), and a CV > 2.45 mm is a protection factor against short-term mortality (p = 0.02).
Despite these results, this study had some limitations. First, it was a retrospective study with a small number of patients from a single center, in which short-term outcomes were monitored. Secondly, the abundance of exclusion criteria additionally reduced the batch of patients. In the future, we recommend conducting a prospective, multicenter study with long-term outcome monitorization and the recording of the causes of primary patency failure. Another limitation was the non-recorded or -assessed impacts of chronic medications used before admission (such as corticosteroids and anti-inflammatory drugs) on inflammatory biomarkers. Furthermore, additional research is necessary to support our findings.

5. Conclusions

Our findings concluded that higher preoperative NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, and Ca-P product values determined before operations strongly predict AVF maturation failure, early thrombosis, and short-time mortality. Secondly, the small preoperative diameters of RA, BA, and CV, as partners in the RC-AVF and BC-AVF anastomoses, strongly predicted AVF maturation failure, early thrombosis, and short-time mortality. Moreover, a higher PNI value was a protective factor for any negative event during the studied period. Given the accessibility and low cost of the ratios and of determining vessel diameters, they can be considered for preoperative risk group stratification, better patient management, and developing predictive patterns.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, software, and writing—original draft preparation, R.K. and E.M.A. (Emil Marian Arbănași); validation, all authors; formal analysis, S.V., B.A.S. and E.H.; investigation, resources, and data curation, A.V.M. and I.H. (Ioan Hosu); writing—review and editing, E.M.A. (Eliza Mihaela Arbănași) and I.H. (Ioana Halmaciu); visualization, supervision, and project administration, K.B. and E.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Targu Mures Emergency County Hospital, Romania (protocol code 29290, on 10 November 2021).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Acknowledgments

This paper is part of a Ph.D. thesis from the Doctoral School of Medicine and Pharmacy within the George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures with the title “Clinical, biological and histopathological aspect in vascular access dysfunction of hemodialysis”, which will be presented by Réka Kaller, having the approval of all authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Murad, M.H.; Elamin, M.B.; Sidawy, A.N.; Malaga, G.; Rizvi, A.Z.; Flynn, D.N.; Casey, E.T.; McCausland, F.R.; McGrath, M.M.; Vo, D.H.; et al. Autogenous versus Prosthetic Vascular Access for Hemodialysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Vasc. Surg. 2008, 48, 34S–47S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Almasri, J.; Alsawas, M.; Mainou, M.; Mustafa, R.A.; Wang, Z.; Woo, K.; Cull, D.L.; Murad, M.H. Outcomes of Vascular Access for Hemodialysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Vasc. Surg. 2016, 64, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Al-Jaishi, A.A.; Liu, A.R.; Lok, C.E.; Zhang, J.C.; Moist, L.M. Complications of the Arteriovenous Fistula: A Systematic Review. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. JASN 2017, 28, 1839–1850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Kaller, R.; Mureșan, A.V.; Arbănași, E.M.; Arbănași, E.M.; Kovács, I.; Horváth, E.; Suciu, B.A.; Hosu, I.; Russu, E. Uncommon Surgical Management by AVF between the Great Saphenous Vein and Anterior Tibial Artery for Old Radiocephalic AVF Failure. Life 2022, 12, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Russu, E.; Muresan, A.V.; Arbanasi, E.M.; Nedelea, D.; Suciu, B.A.; Arbanasi, E.M.; Kaller, R. Polytetrafluorethylene Prosthesis Interposition in Vascular Access. Mater. Plast. 2022, 59, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Schmidli, J.; Widmer, M.K.; Basile, C.; de Donato, G.; Gallieni, M.; Gibbons, C.P.; Haage, P.; Hamilton, G.; Hedin, U.; Kamper, L.; et al. Editor’s Choice—Vascular Access: 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Vasc. Surg. 2018, 55, 757–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kopple, J.D. National Kidney Foundation K/DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Nutrition in Chronic Renal Failure. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2001, 37, S66–S70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lok, C.E.; Huber, T.S.; Lee, T.; Shenoy, S.; Yevzlin, A.S.; Abreo, K.; Allon, M.; Asif, A.; Astor, B.C.; Glickman, M.H.; et al. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2020, 75, S1–S164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Woodside, K.J.; Bell, S.; Mukhopadhyay, P.; Repeck, K.J.; Robinson, I.T.; Eckard, A.R.; Dasmunshi, S.; Plattner, B.W.; Pearson, J.; Schaubel, D.E.; et al. Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation in Prevalent Hemodialysis Patients in the United States: A National Study. Am. J. Kidney Dis. Off. J. Natl. Kidney Found. 2018, 71, 793–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Robbin, M.L.; Greene, T.; Allon, M.; Dember, L.M.; Imrey, P.B.; Cheung, A.K.; Himmelfarb, J.; Huber, T.S.; Kaufman, J.S.; Radeva, M.K.; et al. Prediction of Arteriovenous Fistula Clinical Maturation from Postoperative Ultrasound Measurements: Findings from the Hemodialysis Fistula Maturation Study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2018, 29, 2735–2744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Ravani, P.; Brunori, G.; Mandolfo, S.; Cancarini, G.; Imbasciati, E.; Marcelli, D.; Malberti, F. Cardiovascular Comorbidity and Late Referral Impact Arteriovenous Fistula Survival: A Prospective Multicenter Study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. JASN 2004, 15, 204–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Tordoir, J.; Canaud, B.; Haage, P.; Konner, K.; Basci, A.; Fouque, D.; Kooman, J.; Martin-Malo, A.; Pedrini, L.; Pizzarelli, F.; et al. EBPG on Vascular Access. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. Off. Publ. Eur. Dial. Transpl. Assoc. -Eur. Ren. Assoc. 2007, 22 (Suppl. S2), ii88–ii117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Roubicek, C.; Brunet, P.; Huiart, L.; Thirion, X.; Leonetti, F.; Dussol, B.; Jaber, K.; Andrieu, D.; Ramananarivo, P.; Berland, Y. Timing of Nephrology Referral: Influence on Mortality and Morbidity. Am. J. Kidney Dis. Off. J. Natl. Kidney Found. 2000, 36, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Avorn, J.; Winkelmayer, W.C.; Bohn, R.L.; Levin, R.; Glynn, R.J.; Levy, E.; Owen, W. Delayed Nephrologist Referral and Inadequate Vascular Access in Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Failure. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2002, 55, 711–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kaygin, M.A.; Halici, U.; Aydin, A.; Dag, O.; Binici, D.N.; Limandal, H.K.; Arslan, Ü.; Kiymaz, A.; Kahraman, N.; Calik, E.S.; et al. The Relationship between Arteriovenous Fistula Success and Inflammation. Ren. Fail. 2013, 35, 1085–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Usman, R.; Jamil, M.; Abbassi, H. Association between Raised Serum C-Reactive Protein and Arteriovenous Fistula Failure. J. Islamabad Med. Dent. Coll. 2016, 5, 157–160. [Google Scholar]
  17. Wongmahisorn, Y. Role of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Prognostic Indicator for Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula Failure. J. Vasc. Access 2019, 20, 608–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sarioglu, O.; Capar, A.E.; Belet, U. Relationship of Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis and Thrombosis with the Platelet–Lymphocyte Ratio in Hemodialysis Patients. J. Vasc. Access 2020, 21, 630–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Stirbu, O.; Gadalean, F.; Pitea, I.V.; Ciobanu, G.; Schiller, A.; Grosu, I.; Nes, A.; Bratescu, R.; Olariu, N.; Timar, B.; et al. C-Reactive Protein as a Prognostic Risk Factor for Loss of Arteriovenous Fistula Patency in Hemodialyzed Patients. J. Vasc. Surg. 2019, 70, 208–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arbănași, E.M.; Mureșan, A.V.; Coșarcă, C.M.; Kaller, R.; Bud, T.I.; Hosu, I.; Voidăzan, S.T.; Arbănași, E.M.; Russu, E. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Impact on Predicting Outcomes in Patients with Acute Limb Ischemia. Life 2022, 12, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Taurino, M.; Aloisi, F.; Del Porto, F.; Nespola, M.; Dezi, T.; Pranteda, C.; Rizzo, L.; Sirignano, P. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Could Predict Outcome in Patients Presenting with Acute Limb Ischemia. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 4343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Appleton, N.D.; Bailey, D.M.; Morris-Stiff, G.; Lewis, M.H. Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Perioperative Mortality Following Open Elective Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2014, 48, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Ntalouka, M.P.; Nana, P.; Kouvelos, G.N.; Stamoulis, K.; Spanos, K.; Giannoukas, A.; Matsagkas, M.; Arnaoutoglou, E. Association of Neutrophil–Lymphocyte and Platelet–Lymphocyte Ratio with Adverse Events in Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Wang, S.; Liu, H.; Wang, Q.; Cheng, Z.; Sun, S.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, X.; Wang, Z.; Ren, L. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Are Effective Predictors of Prognosis in Patients with Acute Mesenteric Arterial Embolism and Thrombosis. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 2018, 49, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Taşoğlu, I.; Çiçek, O.F.; Lafcı, G.; Kadiroğulları, E.; Sert, D.E.; Demir, A.; Cavus, U.; Colak, N.; Songur, M.; Hodo, B. Usefulness of Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictor of Amputation after Embolectomy for Acute Limb Ischemia. Ann. Vasc. Surg. 2014, 28, 606–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lareyre, F.; Carboni, J.; Chikande, J.; Massiot, N.; Voury-Pons, A.; Umbdenstock, E.; Jean-Baptiste, E.; Hassen-Khodja, R.; Raffort, J. Association of Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratio and Risk of 30-Day Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Aortic Surgical Repair. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2019, 53, 5–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Drugescu, A.; Roca, M.; Zota, I.M.; Costache, A.-D.; Gavril, O.I.; Gavril, R.S.; Vasilcu, T.F.; Mitu, O.; Esanu, I.M.; Roca, I.-C.; et al. Value of the Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratio in Predicting CPET Performance in Patients with Stable CAD and Recent Elective PCI. Med. Kaunas Lith. 2022, 58, 814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Russu, E.; Mureșan, A.V.; Arbănași, E.M.; Kaller, R.; Hosu, I.; Voidăzan, S.; Arbănași, E.M.; Coșarcă, C.M. The Predictive Role of NLR and PLR in Outcome and Patency of Lower Limb Revascularization in Patients with Femoropopliteal Disease. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 2620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mureșan, A.V.; Russu, E.; Arbănași, E.M.; Kaller, R.; Hosu, I.; Arbănași, E.M.; Voidăzan, S.T. The Predictive Value of NLR, MLR, and PLR in the Outcome of End-Stage Kidney Disease Patients. Biomedicines 2022, 10, 1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Woziwodzka, K.; Dziewierz, A.; Pawica, M.; Panek, A.; Krzanowski, M.; Gołasa, P.; Latacz, P.; Burkat, M.; Kuźniewski, M.; Krzanowska, K. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Long-Term All-Cause Mortality in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 5. Folia Med. Cracov. 2019, 59, 55–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kato, S.; Abe, T.; Lindholm, B.; Maruyama, S. Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio: A Promising Prognostic Marker in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Inflamm. Cell Signal. 2015, 2, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Altunoren, O.; Akkus, G.; Sezal, D.T.; Ciftcioglu, M.; Guzel, F.B.; Isiktas, S.; Torun, G.I.; Uyan, M.; Sokmen, M.F.; Sevim, H.A.; et al. Does Neutrophyl to Lymphocyte Ratio Really Predict Chronic Kidney Disease Progression? Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2019, 51, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Solak, Y.; Yilmaz, M.I.; Sonmez, A.; Saglam, M.; Cakir, E.; Unal, H.U.; Gok, M.; Caglar, K.; Oguz, Y.; Yenicesu, M.; et al. Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Independently Predicts Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Clin. Exp. Nephrol. 2013, 17, 532–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Duan, J.; Pan, L.; Yang, M. Preoperative Elevated Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and Derived NLR Are Associated with Poor Prognosis in Patients with Breast Cancer. Medicine 2018, 97, e13340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, J.-H.; Zhai, E.-T.; Yuan, Y.-J.; Wu, K.-M.; Xu, J.-B.; Peng, J.-J.; Chen, C.-Q.; He, Y.-L.; Cai, S.-R. Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index for Predicting Prognosis of Colorectal Cancer. World J. Gastroenterol. 2017, 23, 6261–6272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Topkan, E.; Besen, A.A.; Ozdemir, Y.; Kucuk, A.; Mertsoylu, H.; Pehlivan, B.; Selek, U. Prognostic Value of Pretreatment Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index in Glioblastoma Multiforme Patients Undergoing Postneurosurgical Radiotherapy Plus Concurrent and Adjuvant Temozolomide. Mediat. Inflamm. 2020, 2020, 4392189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Onodera, T.; Goseki, N.; Kosaki, G. Prognostic nutritional index in gastrointestinal surgery of malnourished cancer patients. Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi 1984, 85, 1001–1005. [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhang, J.; Xiao, X.; Wu, Y.; Yang, J.; Zou, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Yang, Q.; Liu, F. Prognostic Nutritional Index as a Predictor of Diabetic Nephropathy Progression. Nutrients 2022, 14, 3634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lin, T.-Y.; Hung, S.-C. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index Is Associated with Unique Health Conditions and Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ruperto, M.; Barril, G. Nutritional Status, Body Composition, and Inflammation Profile in Older Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 4–5: A Case-Control Study. Nutrients 2022, 14, 3650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Sim, J.H.; Jun, I.-G.; Moon, Y.-J.; Jeon, A.R.; Kim, S.-H.; Kim, B.; Song, J.-G. Association of Preoperative Prognostic Nutritional Index and Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Who Underwent Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11, 428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Sim, J.-H.; Bang, J.-Y.; Kim, S.-H.; Kang, S.-J.; Song, J.-G. Association of Preoperative Prognostic Nutritional Index and Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Surgery. Nutrients 2021, 13, 1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Lee, T.; Roy-Chaudhury, P. Advances and New Frontiers in the Pathophysiology of Venous Neointimal Hyperplasia and Dialysis Access Stenosis. Adv. Chronic Kidney Dis. 2009, 16, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Brahmbhatt, A.; Remuzzi, A.; Franzoni, M.; Misra, S. The Molecular Mechanisms of Hemodialysis Vascular Access Failure. Kidney Int. 2016, 89, 303–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hu, H.; Patel, S.; Hanisch, J.J.; Santana, J.M.; Hashimoto, T.; Bai, H.; Kudze, T.; Foster, T.R.; Guo, J.; Yatsula, B.; et al. Future Research Directions to Improve Fistula Maturation and Reduce Access Failure. Semin. Vasc. Surg. 2016, 29, 153–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ahbap, E.; Sakaci, T.; Kara, E.; Sahutoglu, T.; Koc, Y.; Basturk, T.; Sevinc, M.; Akgol, C.; Kayalar, A.O.; Ucar, Z.A.; et al. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-Tolymphocyte Ratio in Evaluation of Inflammation in End-Stage Renal Disease. Clin. Nephrol. 2016, 85, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Turkmen, K.; Erdur, F.M.; Ozcicek, F.; Ozcicek, A.; Akbas, E.M.; Ozbicer, A.; Demirtas, L.; Turk, S.; Tonbul, H.Z. Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Better Predicts Inflammation than Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients. Hemodial. Int. 2013, 17, 391–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, P.; Xia, C.; Liu, P.; Peng, Z.; Huang, H.; Wu, J.; He, Z. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Evaluation of Inflammation in Non-Dialysis Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD). BMC Nephrol. 2020, 21, 511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yaprak, M.; Turan, M.N.; Dayanan, R.; Akın, S.; Değirmen, E.; Yıldırım, M.; Turgut, F. Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Mortality Better than Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Hemodialysis Patients. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2016, 48, 1343–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhu, F.; Yao, Y.; Ci, H.; Shawuti, A. Predictive Value of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio for Primary Patency of Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis. Vascular 2021, 17085381211039672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Umeres-Francia1, G.; Rojas-Fernández, M.; Añazco, P.H.; Benites-Zapata, V. Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratio as a Risk Factor for Mortality in Peruvian Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease. Ren. Replace. Ther. 2021, 8, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Duan, S.; Sun, L.; Zhang, C.; Wu, L.; Nie, G.; Huang, Z.; Xing, C.; Zhang, B.; Yuan, Y. Association of Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio with Kidney Clinicopathologic Features and Renal Outcomes in Patients with Diabetic Kidney Disease. Int. Immunopharmacol. 2021, 93, 107413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Brito, G.M.C.; Fontenele, A.M.M.; Carneiro, E.C.R.L.; Nogueira, I.A.L.; Cavalcante, T.B.; Vale, A.A.M.; Monteiro, S.C.M.; Salgado Filho, N. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratios in Nondialysis Chronic Kidney Patients. Int. J. Inflamm. 2021, 2021, e6678960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Catabay, C.; Obi, Y.; Streja, E.; Soohoo, M.; Park, C.; Rhee, C.M.; Kovesdy, C.P.; Hamano, T.; Kalantar-Zadeh, K. Lymphocyte Cell Ratios and Mortality among Incident Hemodialysis Patients. Am. J. Nephrol. 2017, 46, 408–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Yoshitomi, R.; Nakayama, M.; Sakoh, T.; Fukui, A.; Katafuchi, E.; Seki, M.; Tsuda, S.; Nakano, T.; Tsuruya, K.; Kitazono, T. High Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio Is Associated with Poor Renal Outcomes in Japanese Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Ren. Fail. 2019, 41, 238–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Neuen, B.L.; Leather, N.; Greenwood, A.M.; Gunnarsson, R.; Cho, Y.; Mantha, M.L. Neutrophil–Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients. Ren. Fail. 2016, 38, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Lu, X.; Wang, S.; Zhang, G.; Xiong, R.; Li, H. High Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Is a Significant Predictor of Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality in Patients Undergoing Peritoneal Dialysis. Kidney Blood Press. Res. 2018, 43, 490–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zhang, L.; Nie, Y.; Guo, M.; Wang, L.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, X.; Ding, X.; Xu, X.; Ji, J. Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictor of Long-Term Outcome in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A 5-Year Cohort Study. Blood Purif. 2021, 50, 772–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Erdem, E.; Kaya, C.; Karataş, A.; Dilek, M.; Akpolat, T. Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio in Predicting Short-Term Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients. J. Exp. Clin. Med. 2013, 30, 129–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. An, X.; Mao, H.-P.; Wei, X.; Chen, J.-H.; Yang, X.; Li, Z.-B.; Yu, X.-Q.; Li, Z.-J. Elevated Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Overall and Cardiovascular Mortality in Maintenance Peritoneal Dialysis Patients. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2012, 44, 1521–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhu, X.; Li, G.; Li, S.; Gong, Z.; Liu, J.; Song, S. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte Ratio and Red Blood Cell Distribution Width-to-platelet Ratio Predict Cardiovascular Events in Hemodialysis Patients. Exp. Ther. Med. 2020, 20, 1105–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Kordzadeh, A.; Chung, J.; Panayiotopoulos, Y.P. Cephalic Vein and Radial Artery Diameter in Formation of Radiocephalic Arteriovenous Fistula: A Systematic Review. J. Vasc. Access 2015, 16, 506–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Mendes, R.R.; Farber, M.A.; Marston, W.A.; Dinwiddie, L.C.; Keagy, B.A.; Burnham, S.J. Prediction of Wrist Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation with Preoperative Vein Mapping with Ultrasonography. J. Vasc. Surg. 2002, 36, 460–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Parmar, J.; Aslam, M.; Standfield, N. Pre-Operative Radial Arterial Diameter Predicts Early Failure of Arteriovenous Fistula (AVF) for Haemodialysis. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2007, 33, 113–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Wong, V.; Ward, R.; Taylor, J.; Selvakumar, S.; How, T.V.; Bakran, A. Factors Associated with Early Failure of Arteriovenous Fistulae for Haemodialysis Access. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 1996, 12, 207–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wilmink, T.; Corte-Real Houlihan, M. Diameter Criteria Have Limited Value for Prediction of Functional Dialysis Use of Arteriovenous Fistulas. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 2018, 56, 572–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Khavanin Zadeh, M.; Gholipour, F.; Naderpour, Z.; Porfakharan, M. Relationship between Vessel Diameter and Time to Maturation of Arteriovenous Fistula for Hemodialysis Access. Int. J. Nephrol. 2012, 2012, 942950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Barutcu Atas, D.; Tugcu, M.; Asicioglu, E.; Velioglu, A.; Arikan, H.; Koc, M.; Tuglular, S. Prognostic Nutritional Index Is a Predictor of Mortality in Elderly Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2022, 54, 1155–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Wada, H.; Dohi, T.; Miyauchi, K.; Jun, S.; Endo, H.; Doi, S.; Konishi, H.; Naito, R.; Tsuboi, S.; Ogita, M.; et al. Relationship between the Prognostic Nutritional Index and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease. J. Cardiol. 2018, 72, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. ROC curve analysis (A) for the NLR concerning non-maturation, (B) for the PLR concerning non-maturation, and (C) for the SII concerning non-maturation; (D) for the NLR concerning early thrombosis, (E) for the PLR concerning early thrombosis, and (F) for the SII concerning early thrombosis; and (G) for the NLR concerning mortality, (H) for the PLR concerning mortality, and (I) for the SII concerning mortality.
Figure 1. ROC curve analysis (A) for the NLR concerning non-maturation, (B) for the PLR concerning non-maturation, and (C) for the SII concerning non-maturation; (D) for the NLR concerning early thrombosis, (E) for the PLR concerning early thrombosis, and (F) for the SII concerning early thrombosis; and (G) for the NLR concerning mortality, (H) for the PLR concerning mortality, and (I) for the SII concerning mortality.
Life 12 01447 g001
Figure 2. ROC curve analysis (A) for the PNI concerning non-maturation, (B) for Ca-P product concerning non-maturation, and (C) for CRP concerning non-maturation; (D) for the PNI concerning early thrombosis, (E) for Ca-P product concerning early thrombosis, and (F) for CRP concerning early thrombosis; and (G) for the PNI concerning mortality, (H), for Ca-P product concerning mortality, and (I) for CRP concerning mortality.
Figure 2. ROC curve analysis (A) for the PNI concerning non-maturation, (B) for Ca-P product concerning non-maturation, and (C) for CRP concerning non-maturation; (D) for the PNI concerning early thrombosis, (E) for Ca-P product concerning early thrombosis, and (F) for CRP concerning early thrombosis; and (G) for the PNI concerning mortality, (H), for Ca-P product concerning mortality, and (I) for CRP concerning mortality.
Life 12 01447 g002
Figure 3. ROC curve analysis (A) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning non-maturation in RC-AVF patients, (B) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning early thrombosis in RC-AVF patients, and (C) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning mortality in RC-AVF patients; (D) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning non-maturation in BC-AVF patients, (E) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning early thrombosis in BC-AVF patients, and (F) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning mortality in BC-AVF patients.
Figure 3. ROC curve analysis (A) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning non-maturation in RC-AVF patients, (B) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning early thrombosis in RC-AVF patients, and (C) for the radial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning mortality in RC-AVF patients; (D) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning non-maturation in BC-AVF patients, (E) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning early thrombosis in BC-AVF patients, and (F) for the brachial artery and cephalic vein diameters concerning mortality in BC-AVF patients.
Life 12 01447 g003
Table 1. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, type of AVF, and outcomes of all patients included in the analysis and of the two sub-groups evaluated according to Maturation and Non-Maturation.
Table 1. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, type of AVF, and outcomes of all patients included in the analysis and of the two sub-groups evaluated according to Maturation and Non-Maturation.
VariablesAll Patients
n = 125
Maturation
n = 88
Non-Maturation
n = 37
p-Value
(OR; CI 95%)
Mean age ± SD (min–max)61.64 ± 13.81
(21–84)
60.32 ± 14.82
(21–84)
64.75 ± 10.58
(37–84)
0.03
Male sex no. (%)76 (60.80%)55 (62.5%)21 (56.76%)0.54
(0.78; 0.36–1.71)
Comorbidities and Risk Factors
AH, no. (%)102 (81.6%)71 (80.68%)31 (83.78%)0.68
(1.23; 0.44–3.43)
AF, no. (%)34 (27.2%)22 (25%)12 (32.43%)0.39
(1.44; 0.62–3.33)
CHF, no. (%)47 (37.6%)24 (27.27%)23 (62.16%)0.0004
(4.38; 1.94–9.88)
IHD, no. (%)83 (66.4%)55 (62.5%)28 (75.68%)0.15
(1.86; 0.78–4.43)
MI, no. (%)55 (44%)36 (40.91%)19 (51.35%)0.28
(1.52; 0.70–3.30)
T2D, no. (%)52 (41.6%)26 (29.55%)26 (70.27%)0.0001
(5.63; 2.43–13.06)
CVA, no. (%)40 (32%)25 (28.41%)15 (40.54%)0.18
(1.78; 0.76–3.83)
PAD, no. (%)32 (25.6%)20 (22.73%)12 (32.43%)0.25
(1.63; 0.69–3.81)
Tobacco, no. (%)43 (34.4%)27 (30.68%)16 (43.24%)0.11
(1.90; 0.85–4.25)
Obesity, no. (%)27 (21.6%)21 (23.86%)6 (16.22%)0.34
(0.61; 0.22–1.68)
Laboratory Data
Hemoglobin g/dL, median [Q1–Q3]13.79 [12.89–14.97]13.88 [12.89–14.97]13.67 [12.5–14.6]0.23
Hematocrit %, median [Q1–Q3]42.11 [39.1–45]42.45 [39.11–45.21]41.43 [37–44.5]0.13
Neutrophils × 103/µL, median [Q1–Q3]5.43 [3.92–7.04]4.9 [3.74–6.5]6.56 [5.43–8.66]<0.0001
Lymphocytes × 103/µL, median [Q1–Q3]1.38 [1.05–1.89]1.56 [1.12–2.07]1.07 [0.88–1.3]<0.0001
Monocyte × 103/µL, median [Q1–Q3]0.66 [0.51–0.95]0.66 [0.55–0.92]0.69 [0.45–0.97]0.44
PLT × 103/µL, median [Q1–Q3]219 [170–270]212.5 [166.5–272.5]227 [173–265]0.21
Glucose mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]107 [91.9–143.5]102.85 [91.57–144.95]110 [92.9–134]0.32
Cholesterol mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]171.8 [145.4–214.9]170.8 [143.9–219.45]187.2 [154–208.4]0.32
Triglyceride mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]117.6 [87.3–159.6]121.1 [88.87–165]107 [84.1–137.1]0.21
GFR (mL/min/1.73 m2), median [Q1–Q3]10.19 [5.88–21.59]11.16 [5.94–20.03]9.25 [5.26–21.81]0.29
Serum albumin mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]3.57 [3.13–3.96]3.78 [3.45–4.1]2.93 [2.63–3.21]<0.0001
Serum calcium mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]8.62 [7.89–9.26]8.86 [8.22–9.50]7.90 [6.77–8.82]<0.0001
Serum phosphorous mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]4.76 [3.32–5.74]3.80 [3.18–5.06]6.74 [5.77–7.83]<0.0001
PNI, median [Q1–Q3]43.10 [37–46.85]46.25 [41.78–49.55]34.55 [32.3–37.2]<0.0001
Ca-P product, median [Q1–Q3]39.34 [29.32–50.66]32.51 [27.30–42.93]51.48 [48.16–59.55]<0.0001
CRP mg/dL, median [Q1–Q3]2.02 [1.85–2.15]1.97 [1.83–2.05]2.15 [2.12–2.17]<0.0001
NLR, median [Q1–Q3]3.58 [2.41–5.67]2.86 [2.2–4.34]5.9 [5.31–8.18]<0.0001
PLR, median [Q1–Q3]140.59 [107.4–208.39]129.96 [103.17–174.17]208.39 [139.8–269.79]<0.0001
SII, median [Q1–Q3]823.59 [436.91–1277.02]641.99 [410.26–999.93]1294.63 [963.3–1907.42]<0.0001
Type of AVF
RC-AVF, no. (%)64 (51.2%)47 (53.41%)17 (45.95%)0.44
(0.74; 0.34–1.60)
Radial artery diameter, median [Q1–Q3]2.4 [2.08–3]2.8 [2.3–3.25]2.05 [1.9–2.2]<0.0001
Cephalic vein diameter, median [Q1–Q3]2.8 [2.1–4.22]3.3 [2.5–4.6]2.1 [1.9–2.3]<0.0001
BC-AVF, no. (%)61 (48.8%)41 (46.59%)20 (54.05%)0.44
(1.34; 0.62–2.91)
Brachial artery diameter, median [Q1–Q3]3.5 [2.5–4.5]3.8 [3.1–5]2.5 [2.32–2.67]<0.0001
Cephalic vein diameter, median [Q1–Q3]3.4 [2.1–5.8]4.2 [3.4–6.5]2.1 [1.8–2.32]<0.0001
Outcomes
Early thrombosis, no. (%)22 (17.6%)-22 (43.24%)0.0001
Mortality, no. (%)10 (8.0%)3 (3.41%)7 (18.92%)0.008
(6.61; 1.60–27.21)
AH = arterial hypertension; AF = atrial fibrillation; CHF = chronic heart failure; IHD = ischemic heart disease; MI = myocardial infarction; T2D = type 2 diabetes; CVA = cerebrovascular accident; PAD = peripheral arterial disease; PLT = total platelet count; NLR = neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; PLR = platelet to lymphocyte ratio; SII = systemic inflammatory index; PNI = prognostic nutritional index; CRP = C-reactive protein; RC-AVF = radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; and BC-AVF = brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula.
Table 2. Outcomes of all patients included in the analysis and of the two sub-groups evaluated according to AVF type.
Table 2. Outcomes of all patients included in the analysis and of the two sub-groups evaluated according to AVF type.
OutcomeAll Patients
n = 125
RC-AVF
n = 64
BC-AVF
n = 61
p-Value
Six-week maturation, no. (%)88 (70.4%)47 (73.43%)41 (67.21%)0.44
Early thrombosis, no. (%)22 (17.6%)9 (14.06%)13 (61.31%)0.29
Mortality, no. (%)10 (8%)4 (6.25%)6 (9.83%)0.46
Overall maturation, no. (%)109 (87.2%)51 (79.68%)58 (95.08%)0.01
RC-AVF = radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; BC-AVF = brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula.
Table 3. ROC curves, optimal cut-off values, AUCs, and predictive accuracies of the NLR, PLR, SII, and CRP inflammatory markers, Ca-P product, the PNI, and vessel diameters.
Table 3. ROC curves, optimal cut-off values, AUCs, and predictive accuracies of the NLR, PLR, SII, and CRP inflammatory markers, Ca-P product, the PNI, and vessel diameters.
VariablesCut-OffAUCStd. Error95% CISensitivitySpecificityp-Value
Non-Maturation
NLR4.900.8560.0390.780–0.93281.1%84.1%<0.0001
PLR172.290.7400.0510.639–0.84170.3%73.9%<0.0001
SII954.540.8020.0440.716–0.88878.4%72.7%<0.0001
PNI40.590.8520.0360.780–0.92380.7%81.1%<0.0001
Ca-P product47.360.8590.0380.784–0.93481.1%80.7%<0.0001
CRP2.070.7850.0430.700–0.87183.8%73.9%<0.0001
RC-AVFRA diameter2.250.8690.0440.783–0.95678.7%88.2%<0.0001
CV diameter2.550.8660.0440.779–0.95372.3%99.05%<0.0001
BC-AVFBA diameter2.950.8410.0500.742–0.94082.9%80%<0.0001
CV diameter2.700.8940.0430.810–0.97885.4%90%<0.0001
Early Thrombosis
NLR4.900.7800.0500.681–0.87877.3%73.8%<0.0001
PLR181.720.7390.0660.611–0.86872.7%71.8%<0.0001
SII859.220.7360.0560.626–0.84581.8%61.2%0.001
PNI38.650.8390.0380.766–0.91378.6%81.8%<0.0001
Ca-P product49.670.7770.0540.671–0.88372.7%80.6%<0.0001
CRP2.070.7850.0420.702–0.86986.4%66%<0.0001
RC-AVFRA diameter2.350.8260.0520.725–0.92761.8%100%0.002
CV diameter2.350.8570.0490.761–0.95274.5%88.9%0.001
BC-AVFBA diameter2.950.7840.0650.621–0.87670.8%69.2%0.006
CV diameter2.700.7800.0580.667–0.89475%99.3%0.002
Mortality
NLR5.830.8460.0590.730–0.96280%83.5%<0.0001
PLR212.890.8170.0530.713–0.92280%80.9%0.001
SII949.710.7770.0610.656–0.89790%60.9%0.004
PNI33.200.9040.0520.803–1.00091.3%80%0.01
Ca-P product41.360.7140.0750.566–0.86290%58.3%0.02
CRP2.150.7850.0810.626–0.94370%82.6%0.001
RC-AVFRA diameter2.350.7710.0710.611–0.93156.7%100%0.07
CV diameter2.150.9020.0440.815–0.98978.3%100%0.007
BC-AVFBA diameter2.700.7860.0660.656–0.91770.9%83.3%0.02
CV diameter2.450.7920.0590.677–0.90770.9%83.3%0.01
NLR = neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; PLR = platelet to lymphocyte ratio; SII = systemic inflammatory index; PNI = prognostic nutritional index; CRP = C-reactive protein; RC-AVF = radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; BC-AVF = brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; RA = radial artery; BA = brachial artery; and CV = cephalic vein.
Table 4. Univariate analysis of the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, vessel diameters, and all adverse event occurrences during the studied period for all patients.
Table 4. Univariate analysis of the NLR, PLR, SII, CRP, Ca-P product, PNI, vessel diameters, and all adverse event occurrences during the studied period for all patients.
Non-MaturationEarly ThrombosisMortality
Low NLR vs. high NLR74/81 (91.36%) vs. 14/44 (31.88%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 22.65 CI: (8.32–61.67)
5/81 (6.17%) vs. 17/44 (38.64%) p < 0.0001
OR: 9.57 CI: (3.21–28.45)
2/97 (2.06%) vs. 8/28 (28.57%)
p = 0.0004
OR: 19 CI: (3.74–96.27)
Low PLR vs. high PLR65/76 (85.55%) vs. 23/49 (46.94%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 9.66 CI: (3.88–24.07)
6/80 (7.50%) vs. 16/45 (35.55%)
p = 0.0003
OR: 6.80 CI: (2.42–19.09)
2/95 (2.10%) vs. 8/30 (26.67%) p = 0.0006
OR: 16.90 CI: (3.35–85.24)
Low SII vs. high SII64/72 (88.89%) vs. 24/53 (44.28%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 9.66 CI: (3.88–24.07)
4/67 (5.97%) vs. 18/58 (31.03%)
p = 0.0009
OR: 7.08 CI: (2.23–22.46)
1/71 (1.40%) vs. 9/54 (16.67%)
p = 0.01
OR: 14.0 CI: (1.71–114.29)
Low PNI vs. high PNI16/46 (34.78%) vs. 72/79 (91.14%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 0.05 CI: (0.01–0.13)
15/40 (37.50%) vs. 7/85 (8.23%) p = 0.0002
OR: 0.14 CI: (0.05–0.40)
8/19 (42.11%) vs. 2/106 (1.89%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 0.02 CI: (0.005–0.14)
Low Ca-P product vs. High Ca-P product69/78 (88.46%) vs. 19/47 (40.43%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 11.29 CI: (4.56–27.97)
6/89 (6.74%) vs. 16/36 (44.44%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 11.06 CI: (3.84–31.86)
1/69 (1.47%) vs. 9/57 (15.79%) p = 0.01
OR: 12.75 CI: (1.56–103.99)
Low CRP vs. high CRP63/71 (88.73%) vs. 25/54 (46.30%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 9.13 CI: (3.67–22.68)
3/71 (4.23%) vs. 19/54 (35.19%)
p = 0.0001
OR: 12.30 CI: (3.40–44.43)
3/94 (3.19%) vs. 7/31 (22.58%)
p = 0.002
OR: 8.84 CI: (2.12–36.79)
RC-AVFNon-MaturationEarly ThrombosisMortality
Low RA diameter vs. high RA diameter10/25 (40%) vs. 37/39 (94.87%)
p = 0.0009
OR: 14.6 CI: (3.02–70.60)
8/30 (26.67%) vs. 1/34 (2.94%) p = 0.02
OR: 0.08 CI: (0.009–0.71)
4/30 (13.33%) vs. 0/34 (0%)
p = 0.10
OR: 0.08 CI: (0.004–1.65)
Low CV diameter vs. high CV diameter13/29 (44.82%) vs. 34/35 (97.14%)
p = 0.0001
OR: 27.75 CI: (5.42–141.98)
8/22 (36.36%) vs. 1/42 (2.38%)
p = 0.004
OR: 0.04 CI: (0.004–0.37)
4/17 (23.52%) vs. 0/47 (0%) p = 0.02
OR: 0.03 CI: (0.001–0.62)
BC-AVFNon-MaturationEarly ThrombosisMortality
Low BA diameter vs. high BA diameter7/23 (30.43%) vs. 34/38 (89.47%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 19.42 CI: (4.96–76.05)
9/23 (39.13%) vs. 4/38 (10.52%) p = 0.01
OR: 0.18 CI: (0.04–0.69)
5/21 (23.80%) vs. 1/40 (2.50%)
p = 0.02
OR: 0.08 CI: (0.008–0.75)
Low CV diameter vs. high CV diameter6/24 (40%) vs. 35/37 (94.59%)
p < 0.0001
OR: 52.5 CI: (9.60–286.89)
11/24 (45.83%) vs. 3/37 (8.10%)
p = 0.001
OR: 0.10 CI: (0.02–0.43)
5/21 (23.80%) vs. 1/40 (2.50%)
p = 0.02
OR: 0.08 CI: (0.008–0.75)
NLR = neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; PLR = platelet to lymphocyte ratio; SII = systemic inflammatory index; PNI = prognostic nutritional index; CRP = C-reactive protein; RC-AVF = radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; BC-AVF = brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; RA = radial artery; BA = brachial artery; and CV = cephalic vein.
Table 5. Multivariate analysis of the new adverse events that occurred during the study period.
Table 5. Multivariate analysis of the new adverse events that occurred during the study period.
Non-MaturationEarly ThrombosisMortality
OR95% CIp-ValueOR95% CIp-ValueOR95% CIp-Value
CHF4.383.88–24.07<0.0013.711.41–9.710.0081.110.29–4.180.87
MI1.520.70–3.300.281.670.66–4.220.271.300.35–4.730.69
T2D5.632.43–13.06<0.0013.821.43–10.210.0080.930.24–3.470.91
Tobacco1.720.77–3.800.171.450.54–3.610.480.450.09–2.220.32
RC-AVFHigh RA diameter0.030.007–0.18<0.0010.050.006–0.480.0090.190.01–1.970.16
High CV diameter0.020.003–0.19<0.0010.040.005–0.370.0040.040.009–0.750.04
BC-AVFHigh BA diameter0.050.01–0.20<0.0010.180.04–0.690.010.080.009–0.750.02
High CV diameter0.010.003–0.10<0.0010.020.003–0.230.0010.080.009–0.750.02
High NLR22.658.32–61.67<0.0019.573.21–28.45<0.00119.03.75–96.27<0.001
High PLR6.682.85–15.63<0.0016.802.42–19.09<0.00116.903.35–85.24<0.001
High SII9.663.88–24.07<0.0017.082.23–22.46<0.00114.01.71–114.280.01
High PNI0.050.02–0.14<0.0010.150.05–0.40<0.0010.020.005–0.14<0.001
High Ca-P Product17.896.73–47.60<0.00111.063.84–31.86<0.00112.561.54–102.480.01
High CRP14.605.39–39.49<0.00112.303.40–44.43<0.0018.842.12–36.790.003
CHF = chronic heart failure; MI = myocardial infarction; T2D = type 2 diabetes; NLR = neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; PLR = platelet to lymphocyte ratio; SII = systemic inflammatory index; PNI = prognostic nutritional index; CRP = C-reactive protein; RC-AVF = radio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; BC-AVF = brachio-cephalic arteriovenous fistula; RA = radial artery; BA = brachial artery; and CV = cephalic vein.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kaller, R.; Arbănași, E.M.; Mureșan, A.V.; Voidăzan, S.; Arbănași, E.M.; Horváth, E.; Suciu, B.A.; Hosu, I.; Halmaciu, I.; Brinzaniuc, K.; et al. The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Markers, the Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Measured Vessels’ Diameters in Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation Failure. Life 2022, 12, 1447. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091447

AMA Style

Kaller R, Arbănași EM, Mureșan AV, Voidăzan S, Arbănași EM, Horváth E, Suciu BA, Hosu I, Halmaciu I, Brinzaniuc K, et al. The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Markers, the Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Measured Vessels’ Diameters in Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation Failure. Life. 2022; 12(9):1447. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091447

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kaller, Réka, Emil Marian Arbănași, Adrian Vasile Mureșan, Septimiu Voidăzan, Eliza Mihaela Arbănași, Emőke Horváth, Bogdan Andrei Suciu, Ioan Hosu, Ioana Halmaciu, Klara Brinzaniuc, and et al. 2022. "The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Markers, the Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Measured Vessels’ Diameters in Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation Failure" Life 12, no. 9: 1447. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091447

APA Style

Kaller, R., Arbănași, E. M., Mureșan, A. V., Voidăzan, S., Arbănași, E. M., Horváth, E., Suciu, B. A., Hosu, I., Halmaciu, I., Brinzaniuc, K., & Russu, E. (2022). The Predictive Value of Systemic Inflammatory Markers, the Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Measured Vessels’ Diameters in Arteriovenous Fistula Maturation Failure. Life, 12(9), 1447. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091447

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop