Literature DB >> 27044797

Comparison of Early Mechanical and Infective Complications in First Time Blind, Bedside, Midline Percutaneous Tenckhoff Catheter Insertion with Ultra-Short Break-In Period in Diabetics and Non-Diabetics: Setting New Standards.

Ninoo George1, Suceena Alexander2, Vinoi George David1, Gopal Basu1, Anjali Mohapatra1, Anna T Valson1, Shibu Jacob1, Harish K Pathak1, Antony Devasia3, Veerasamy Tamilarasi1, Santosh Varughese1.   

Abstract


BACKGROUND: There are no large studies that have examined ultra-short break-in period with a blind, bedside, midline approach to Tenckhoff catheter insertion. ♦
METHODS: Observational cohort study of 245 consecutive adult patients who underwent percutaneous catheter insertion for chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD) at our center from January 2009 to December 2013. There were 132 (53.9%) diabetics and 113 (46.1%) non-diabetics in the cohort. ♦
RESULTS: The mean break-in period for the percutaneous group was 2.68 ± 2.6 days. There were significantly more males among the diabetics (103 [78%] vs 66 [58.4%], p = 0.001). Diabetics had a significantly higher body mass index (BMI) (23.9 ± 3.7 kg/m2 vs 22.2 ± 4 kg/m2, p < 0.001) and lower serum albumin (33.1 ± 6.3 g/L vs 37 ± 6 g/L, p < 0.001) compared with non-diabetics. Poor catheter outflow was present in 6 (4.5%) diabetics and 16 (14.2%) non-diabetics (p = 0.009). Catheter migration was also significantly more common in the non-diabetic group (11 [9.7%] vs 2 [1.5%], p = 0.004). Primary catheter non-function was present in 17(15%) of the non-diabetics and in 7(5.3%) of the diabetics (p = 0.01). There were no mortality or major non-procedural complications during the catheter insertions. Among patients with 1 year of follow-up data, catheter survival (93/102 [91.2%] vs 71/82 [86.6%], p = 0.32) and technique survival (93/102 [91.2%] vs 70/82 [85.4%], p = 0.22) at 1 year was comparable between diabetics and non-diabetics, respectively. ♦
CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous catheter insertion by practicing nephrologists provides a short break-in period with very low mechanical and infective complications. Non-diabetic status emerged as a significant risk factor for primary catheter non-function presumed to be due to more patients with lower BMI and thus smaller abdominal cavities. This is the first report that systematically compares diabetic and non-diabetic patients.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Peritoneal dialysis; catheters; mechanical processes; methods; mortality; peritonitis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27044797      PMCID: PMC5174873          DOI: 10.3747/pdi.2015.00097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perit Dial Int        ISSN: 0896-8608            Impact factor:   1.756


  33 in total

1.  Peritoneal dialysis-related infections recommendations: 2010 update.

Authors:  Philip Kam-Tao Li; Cheuk Chun Szeto; Beth Piraino; Judith Bernardini; Ana E Figueiredo; Amit Gupta; David W Johnson; Ed J Kuijper; Wai-Choong Lye; William Salzer; Franz Schaefer; Dirk G Struijk
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.756

2.  Clinical practice guidelines for peritoneal access.

Authors:  Ana Figueiredo; Bak-Leong Goh; Sarah Jenkins; David W Johnson; Robert Mactier; Santhanam Ramalakshmi; Badri Shrestha; Dirk Struijk; Martin Wilkie
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.756

3.  Early start of CAPD with the Seldinger technique.

Authors:  Oktay Banli; Hasan Altun; Aysegul Oztemel
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.756

4.  Peritoneoscopic versus surgical placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a prospective randomized study on outcome.

Authors:  M F Gadallah; A Pervez; M A el-Shahawy; D Sorrells; G Zibari; J McDonald; J Work
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 8.860

5.  Complications with permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters: experience with 154 percutaneously placed catheters.

Authors:  M Allon; J M Soucie; E J Macon
Journal:  Nephron       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 2.847

6.  Percutaneous and surgical insertion of peritoneal catheter in patients starting in chronic dialysis therapy: a comparative study.

Authors:  Domingos Candiota Chula; Rodrigo Peixoto Campos; Márcia Tokunaga de Alcântara; Miguel Carlos Riella; Marcelo Mazza do Nascimento
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 7.  Dialysate leaks in peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  M Leblanc; D Ouimet; V Pichette
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.455

8.  Complications after tenckhoff catheter insertion: a single-centre experience using multiple operators over four years.

Authors:  Wen Jiun Liu; Lai Seong Hooi
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 1.756

9.  Immediate initiation of CAPD following percutaneous catheter placement without break-in procedure.

Authors:  Young-Il Jo; Sug Kyun Shin; Jong-Ho Lee; Jong-Oh Song; Jung-Hwan Park
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.756

10.  Peritoneal dialysis catheters: a comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques.

Authors:  G J Mellotte; C A Ho; S H Morgan; M R Bending; A J Eisinger
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 5.992

View more
  2 in total

1.  The ideal position of the peritoneal dialysis catheter is not always ideal.

Authors:  Tatiana Tanasiychuk; Rafael Selgas; Daniel Kushnir; Muhammad Abd Elhalim; Alon Antebi; Gloria Del Peso; Maria A Bajo; Victor Frajewicki
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Safety and Efficacy of Bedside Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in the COVID-19 Era: Initial Experience at a New York City Hospital.

Authors:  Mariana Vigiola Cruz; Omar Bellorin; Vesh Srivatana; Cheguevara Afaneh
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 3.352

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.