BACKGROUND: Recent single-arm studies reported good catheter outcome despite shorter break-in periods after peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertions. These results were attributed to tight catheter securing during the insertions. OBJECTIVE: To compare catheter-related outcomes after different break-in periods in the tightly secured PD catheters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study cohort comprised 48 patients, who underwent catheter insertions with the modified insertion technique. Based on the duration of break-in period, the patients were grouped into a shorter break-in period arm, with break-in period of 7 days or less and a standard break-in period arm, with break-in period of about 2 weeks. Mean patient follow up was 9.68 +/- 4.35 months, with a similar follow-up duration between the two break-in period arms (P = 0.94). RESULTS: In the study cohort, the incidence of pericatheter leaks, pericatheter haemorrhage, catheter malfunction and peritonitis was 2/48 (4%), 1/48 (2%), 1/48 (2%) and 3/48 (6%), respectively. There was no other-site leak, bowel perforation, hernia formation or wound dehiscence. Of these complications, two pericatheter leaks, one catheter malfunction and three peritonitis episodes followed standard break-in periods, whereas, one pericatheter haemorrhage occurred in the shorter break-in period arm. CONCLUSION: After a tight catheter securing during the insertions, overall pericatheter leak incidence remained low in the whole study cohort, and it did not worsen despite a shorter break-in period. Future studies with larger patient numbers are needed to validate the role of shorter break-in period in PD practice.
BACKGROUND: Recent single-arm studies reported good catheter outcome despite shorter break-in periods after peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertions. These results were attributed to tight catheter securing during the insertions. OBJECTIVE: To compare catheter-related outcomes after different break-in periods in the tightly secured PD catheters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study cohort comprised 48 patients, who underwent catheter insertions with the modified insertion technique. Based on the duration of break-in period, the patients were grouped into a shorter break-in period arm, with break-in period of 7 days or less and a standard break-in period arm, with break-in period of about 2 weeks. Mean patient follow up was 9.68 +/- 4.35 months, with a similar follow-up duration between the two break-in period arms (P = 0.94). RESULTS: In the study cohort, the incidence of pericatheter leaks, pericatheter haemorrhage, catheter malfunction and peritonitis was 2/48 (4%), 1/48 (2%), 1/48 (2%) and 3/48 (6%), respectively. There was no other-site leak, bowel perforation, hernia formation or wound dehiscence. Of these complications, two pericatheter leaks, one catheter malfunction and three peritonitis episodes followed standard break-in periods, whereas, one pericatheter haemorrhage occurred in the shorter break-in period arm. CONCLUSION: After a tight catheter securing during the insertions, overall pericatheter leak incidence remained low in the whole study cohort, and it did not worsen despite a shorter break-in period. Future studies with larger patient numbers are needed to validate the role of shorter break-in period in PD practice.