According to the published paper "outcomes comparison of hero and lower extremity arteriovenous grafts in patients with long-standing renal failure," one hero patient developed upper extremity steal syndrome following hero insertion and was treated on the first postoperative day with a 4-mm eptfe interposition at the arterial anastomosis.Additional information regarding the hero patient was requested on 04/15/2015 from the leading author of the publication.The specific information requested included the following: date of implant, date of steal syndrome, success of the intervention, patient comorbidities, current status of the patient, and the lot number.The surgeon replied on 04/26/2015 stating, "i've been trying to find some of the data, however with the study being completed 3 years ago i haven't had any success.In addition, after data collection, the database was de-identified in standard fashion.With my involvement being so long ago, i'm afraid i can't recall any of the specifics that you're asking." a manufacturing record review could not be performed as lot numbers were unavailable.The hero graft instructions for use (ifu) lists vascular insufficiency due to steal syndrome as a potential complication that ranges from 2.6% to 3.8% with hero and 3.8% in other arteriovenous grafts (avgs).Steal syndrome is not unique to the hero graft and is a well-known complication of arteriovenous access conduits; fistula, prosthetic, biologic, and xenograft inclusive.Banding procedures are well established treatments to relieve steal syndrome, as was done in this situation.Steal syndrome is a known complication of the hero device caused by shunting of blood into the venous system.This complication does not reflect a defect in the device itself and adequate precautions are provided in the ifu.
|