OBJECTIVE: We wanted to report our experience of metallic stent placement after insufficient balloon dilation in graft hemodialysis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients (13 loop grafts in the forearm and 10 straight grafts in the upper arm) underwent metallic stent placement due to insufficient flow after urokinase thrombolysis and balloon dilation. The indications for metallic stent deployment included 1) recoil and/or kinked venous stenosis in 21 patients (venous anastomosis: 17 patients, peripheral outflow vein: four patients); and 2) major vascular rupture in two patients. Metallic stents 8-10mm in diameter and 40-80 mm in length were used. Of them, eight stents were deployed across the elbow crease. Access patency was determined by clinical follow-up and the overall rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: No procedure-related complications (stent fracture or central migration) were encountered except for a delayed Wallstent shortening/migration at the venous anastomosis, which resulted in early access failure. The overall primary and secondary patency rates (+/- standard error) of all the vascular accesses in our 23 patients at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months were 69% +/- 9 and 88% +/- 6, 41% +/- 10 and 88% +/- 6, 30% +/- 10 and 77% +/- 10, and 12% +/- 8 and 61% +/- 13, respectively. For the forearm and upper-arm grafts, the primary and secondary patency rates were 51% +/- 16 and 86% +/- 13 vs 45% +/- 15 and 73%+/-13 at 6 months, and 25% +/- 15 and 71% +/- 17 vs 23% +/- 17 and 73% +/- 13 at 12 months (p = .346 and .224), respectively. CONCLUSION: Metallic stent placement is a safe and effective means for treating peripheral venous lesions in dialysis graft patients after insufficient balloon dilation. No statistically difference in the patency rates between the forearm and upper-arm patient groups was seen.
Vascular Patency ; Treatment Failure ; Stents ; Renal Dialysis ; Polytetrafluoroethylene ; Middle Aged ; Metals ; Male ; Humans ; Graft Occlusion, Vascular/*therapy ; Forearm ; Female ; *Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical ; *Angioplasty, Balloon ; Aged, 80 and over ; Aged

Mounting evidence indicates that melatonin has possible activity against different tumors. Pazopanib is an anticancer drug used to treat renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study tested the anticancer activity of melatonin combined with pazopanib on RCC cells and explored the underlying mechanistic pathways of its action. Methods: The 786-O and A-498 human RCC cell lines were used as cell models. Cell viability and tumorigenesis were detected with the MTT and colony formation assays, respectively. Apoptosis and autophagy were assessed using TUNEL, annexin V/propidium iodide, and acridine orange staining with flow cytometry. The expression of cellular signaling proteins was investigated with western blotting. The in vivo growth of tumors derived from RCC cells was evaluated using a xenograft mouse model. Results: Together, melatonin and pazopanib reduced cell viability and colony formation and promoted the apoptosis of RCC cells. Furthermore, the combination of melatonin and pazopanib triggered more mitochondrial, caspase-mediated, and LC3-II-mediated autophagic apoptosis than melatonin or pazopanib alone. The combination also induced higher activation of the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (p38MAPK) in the promotion of autophagy and apoptosis by RCC cells than melatonin or pazopanib alone. Finally, tumor xenograft experiments confirmed that melatonin and pazopanib cooperatively inhibited RCC growth in vivo and predicted a possible interaction between melatonin/pazopanib and LC3-II. Conclusion: The combination of melatonin and pazopanib inhibits the growth of RCC cells by inducing p38MAPK-mediated mitochondrial and autophagic apoptosis. Therefore, melatonin might be a potential adjuvant that could act synergistically with pazopanib for RCC treatment.

Background/Aims: Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients who failed antiviral therapy are at increased risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the potential role of metformin and statins, medications for diabetes mellitus (DM) and hyperlipidemia (HLP), in reducing HCC risk among these patients. Methods: We included CHC patients from the T-COACH study who failed antiviral therapy. We tracked the onset of HCC 1.5 years post-therapy by linking to Taiwan’s cancer registry data from 2003 to 2019. We accounted for death and liver transplantation as competing risks and employed Gray’s cumulative incidence and Cox subdistribution hazards models to analyze HCC development. Results: Out of 2,779 patients, 480 (17.3%) developed HCC post-therapy. DM patients not using metformin had a 51% increased risk of HCC compared to non-DM patients, while HLP patients on statins had a 50% reduced risk compared to those without HLP. The 5-year HCC incidence was significantly higher for metformin non-users (16.5%) versus non-DM patients (11.3%; adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [aSHR]=1.51; P=0.007) and metformin users (3.1%; aSHR=1.59; P=0.022). Statin use in HLP patients correlated with a lower HCC risk (3.8%) compared to non-HLP patients (12.5%; aSHR=0.50; P<0.001). Notably, the increased HCC risk associated with non-use of metformin was primarily seen in non-cirrhotic patients, whereas statins decreased HCC risk in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients. Conclusions Metformin and statins may have a chemopreventive effect against HCC in CHC patients who failed antiviral therapy. These results support the need for personalized preventive strategies in managing HCC risk.