Lamya Boujelbane1, Ning Fu1, Kevin Chapla1, David Melnick2, Robert R Redfield3, Sana Waheed1, Alexander S Yevzlin1, Jung-Im Shin4, Brad C Astor1,4, Micah R Chan1. 1. Division of Nephrology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin - USA. 2. Division of General Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin - USA. 3. Division of Transplant Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin - USA. 4. Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin - USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Several small studies have suggested that the percutaneous method of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion is effective and has a lower complication rate than surgical techniques (open, laparoscopic or peritoneoscopic), although no randomized, controlled study has compared these methods. Our objective was to compare percutaneous PD catheter insertion vs surgical placement in terms of 1-year catheter survival, catheter dysfunction, fluid leak and incidence of peritonitis. METHODS: We searched Medline for English-language literature from 1966 through June 2014, along with national conference proceedings and reference lists of all included publications to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were having a measure of catheter survival at 1 year, catheter dysfunction, peritonitis rate per patient-month or fluid leak as outcomes. Studies were excluded if they were not in English or if they included pediatric patients. Random effects models were used to derive the pooled risk ratios, differences in patency and their variations. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a total of 2,681 subjects met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in 1-year catheter survival in percutaneous vs surgical PD catheter placement (relative risk [RR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.11, p = 0.19). Catheter dysfunction also did not differ significantly between the groups (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.57-1.29, p = 0.46). The prevalence of peritoneal fluid leak also was similar for percutaneous and surgical groups (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.58-2.09, p = 0.77). However, there was a significant lower incidence of peritonitis among those with percutaneous placement (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.62-0.96, p = 0.02). Significant heterogeneity was detected across studies (I2 = 78.4%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that there is no significant difference in catheter survival between percutaneous and surgical placement of PD catheters. Whether there are significant benefits from percutaneous placement in terms of peritonitis rates requires further robust studies. These findings have significant implications for future design of clinical trials in the placement of PD catheters and the delivery of dialysis-related services.
PURPOSE: Several small studies have suggested that the percutaneous method of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion is effective and has a lower complication rate than surgical techniques (open, laparoscopic or peritoneoscopic), although no randomized, controlled study has compared these methods. Our objective was to compare percutaneous PD catheter insertion vs surgical placement in terms of 1-year catheter survival, catheter dysfunction, fluid leak and incidence of peritonitis. METHODS: We searched Medline for English-language literature from 1966 through June 2014, along with national conference proceedings and reference lists of all included publications to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were having a measure of catheter survival at 1 year, catheter dysfunction, peritonitis rate per patient-month or fluid leak as outcomes. Studies were excluded if they were not in English or if they included pediatric patients. Random effects models were used to derive the pooled risk ratios, differences in patency and their variations. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a total of 2,681 subjects met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in 1-year catheter survival in percutaneous vs surgical PD catheter placement (relative risk [RR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.11, p = 0.19). Catheter dysfunction also did not differ significantly between the groups (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.57-1.29, p = 0.46). The prevalence of peritoneal fluid leak also was similar for percutaneous and surgical groups (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.58-2.09, p = 0.77). However, there was a significant lower incidence of peritonitis among those with percutaneous placement (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.62-0.96, p = 0.02). Significant heterogeneity was detected across studies (I2 = 78.4%, p&lt;0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that there is no significant difference in catheter survival between percutaneous and surgical placement of PD catheters. Whether there are significant benefits from percutaneous placement in terms of peritonitis rates requires further robust studies. These findings have significant implications for future design of clinical trials in the placement of PD catheters and the delivery of dialysis-related services.
Authors: Pavitra Manu Dogra; Ranjith K Nair; Amit Katyal; G Shanmugraj; Ashok K Hooda; Anantharam Jairam; Satish Mendonca; Parikshit Singh Chauhan Journal: Indian J Nephrol Date: 2021-04-02