Prospective randomized study for comparison of open surgery with laparoscopic-assisted placement of Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter--a single center experience and literature review

Comparative analysis of complications and technique survival in peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: single purse-string suture vs. double purses-string suture

OBJECTIVE

Single- and double-purse-string suture methods are both widely used in open surgical catheterization for peritoneal dialysis. This study aimed to compare the post-insertion complications and technical survival of the two methods.

METHODS

This retrospective study matched 142 patients who underwent peritoneal catheterization using the single- (Group S) or double- (Group D) purse-string suture method. Baseline clinical data and complications were recorded, and technical and patient survival rates were evaluated over 3 years.

RESULTS

There were no significant intergroup differences in terms of infection complication rates (S, 2.8% vs. D, 5.6%, p = 0.377) or non-infection complication rates (2.1% vs. 2.8%, p = 1.000) within the first month post-insertion. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of technical survival at 1, 2, and 3 years were 96.3%, 90.4%, and 85.9% in group S and 89.9%, 86.7%, and 84.8% in group D, respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.439). Additionally, patient survival rates were comparable between groups over the 3-year follow-up (log-rank test, p = 0.647).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the single- and double-purse-string suture catheter insertion methods have similar post-insertion complication and technical survival rates. These data suggest that the single-purse-string suture method can be adopted as standard practice for peritoneal dialysis catheter placement.

Suture passer combined with two-hole laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheterization in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques are being widely applied for peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter (PDC) placement. The suture passer is a novel fixation tool that aims to reduce catheter migration. We compared the clinical value of the suture passer combined with two-hole laparoscopic PDC placement to open surgical placement by evaluating preoperative and postoperative conditions, as well as the onset of complications in both groups.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted including 169 patients who underwent PDC placement surgery from January 2021 to May 2023. Based on the method employed, patients were divided into two groups: the suture passer combined with a two-hole laparoscopy group (SLG) and the open surgical group (SG). Comprehensive patient information, including general data, preoperative and postoperative indicators, peritoneal function after surgery, and the incidence rate of complications, were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The SLG showed a statistically significant decrease in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and 6-month postoperative drift rate compared to the SG (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of sex, age, primary disease, hospitalization time, hospitalization costs, preoperative and postoperative examination indicators, peritonitis, and omental wrapping.

CONCLUSIONS

Suture passer combined with two-hole laparoscopic PDC placement, characterized by simplicity and facilitating secure catheter fixation, was deemed safe and effective for patients undergoing PD. It reduces the catheter migration rate and improved surgical comfort. Overall, this technique demonstrates favorable outcomes in clinical practice.

Clinical practice guideline for the prevention and management of peritoneal dialysis associated infections in children: 2024 update

Infection-related complications remain the most significant cause for morbidity and technique failure in infants, children and adolescents who receive maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD). The 2024 update of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the Prevention and Management of Peritoneal Dialysis Associated Infection in Children builds upon previous such guidelines published in 2000 and 2012 and provides comprehensive treatment guidance as recommended by an international group of pediatric PD experts based upon a review of published literature and pediatric PD registry data. The workgroup prioritized updating key clinical issues contained in the 2012 guidelines, in addition to addressing additional questions developed using the PICO format. A variety of new guideline statements, highlighted by those pertaining to antibiotic therapy of peritonitis as a result of the evolution of antibiotic susceptibilities, antibiotic stewardship and clinical registry data, as well as new clinical benchmarks, are included. Recommendations for future research designed to fill important knowledge gaps are also provided.

A nephrologist dream of peritoneal dialysis catheter with zero migration: A multicenter prospective study

INTRODUCTION

PD catheter tip migration is a common complication and a significant cause of catheter malfunction. In this perspective, we present our experience with a new catheter and a new technique that involves the use of a new triple cuff PD catheter and a low entry site in an attempt to prevent PD catheter migration.

METHODS

A total of 503 incident PD patients have been studied in more than one PD center over a period of 5 years.

RESULTS

During the 5-year follow up we recorded zero percent catheter migration. Other technical complications were poor drainage in 3.4%, omental wrap in 2.8%, early leakage in 3.4%, and catheter replacement in 2.4%. By the end of the study, the one-year PD catheter survival was 97.6%.

CONCLUSION

Our new triple cuff PD catheter and our low-entry approach seem to be effective in preventing PD catheter migration and minimizing other mechanical complications.

SAGES peritoneal dialysis access guideline update 2023

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery has been used for both de novo insertion and salvage of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters. Advanced laparoscopic, basic laparoscopic, open, and image-guided techniques have evolved as the most popular techniques. The aim of this guideline was to develop evidence-based guidelines that support surgeons, patients, and other physicians in decisions on minimally invasive peritoneal dialysis access and the salvage of malfunctioning catheters in both adults and children.

METHODS

A guidelines committee panel of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons reviewed the literature since the prior guideline was published in 2014 and developed seven key questions in adults and four in children. After a systematic review of the literature, by the panel, evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Recommendations for future research were also proposed.

RESULTS

After systematic review, data extraction, and evidence to decision meetings, the panel agreed on twelve recommendations for the peri-operative performance of laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis access surgery and management of catheter dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

In the adult population, conditional recommendations were made in favor of: staged hernia repair followed by PD catheter insertion over simultaneous and traditional start over urgent start of PD when medically possible. Furthermore, the panel suggested advanced laparoscopic insertion techniques rather than basic laparoscopic techniques or open insertion. Conditional recommendations were made for either advanced laparoscopic or image-guided percutaneous insertion and for either nonoperative or operative salvage. A recommendation could not be made regarding concomitant clean-contaminated surgery in adults. In the pediatric population, conditional recommendations were made for either traditional or urgent start of PD, concomitant clean or clean-contaminated surgery and PD catheter placement rather than staged, and advanced laparoscopic placement rather than basic or open insertion.

Peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion techniques by the nephrologist

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter is the lifeline of PD patients, and despite the overall strength of the PD program in many countries, PD catheter survival remains the major weakness of the program. The prompt and effective implantation of the PD catheter, as well as speedy management of complications arising from catheter insertion, remains crucial for the success of the program.

Clinical impact of catheter insertion for peritoneal dialysis on patient survival and catheter-related complications

OBJECTIVES

The stepwise initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) using Moncrief and Popovich's technique (SMAP) for catheter insertion is recommended for the systemic introduction of PD and prevention of catheter-related infections. In this study, we investigated patient outcomes in patients who underwent insertion of a PD catheter with a direct method versus the SMAP method.

METHODS

We enrolled 295 consecutive patients who underwent PD as a primary renal replacement therapy and underwent insertion of a PD catheter at our institute between 2006 and 2021. We retrospectively reviewed their data and investigated patient outcomes, including mortality and PD catheter-related complications.

RESULTS

Median age at PD induction was 65 years in the direct insertion group and 65 years in the SMAP group (P = 0.80). The rate of PD introduction after emergency hemodialysis was significantly higher in the direct insertion group than in the SMAP group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in survival between the direct insertion and SMAP groups during the median follow-up period of 54 months (P = 0.12). Additionally, patients who transitioned to hemodialysis or kidney transplantation after PD showed significantly longer survival (P < 0.001). The incidence of PD catheter-related complications was not significantly different between the two groups. A body mass index ≥ 23 kg/m2 was an independent risk factor for peritonitis and exit-site infection (P = 0.006 and P = 0.011, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Planned sequential renal replacement therapy including hybrid hemodialysis, complete hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation after PD is important for improving patient outcomes. PD catheter insertion by SMAP may not be mandatory in our clinical practice.

Optimizing peritoneal dialysis initiation: A comparative cohort study of catheter placement methods for shortening break-in periods

INTRODUCTION

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) guidelines recommend a 14-day break-in period after catheter placement, yet this period could be shortened with new insertion techniques.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study to compare percutaneous vs. surgical catheter insertion in a newly established PD program. The break-in period was intentionally shortened to <24 h to start PD almost immediately.

RESULTS

We included 223 subjects who underwent percutaneous (34%) or surgical (66%) catheter placement. Compared to the surgical group, the percutaneous group had a higher proportion of early dialysis initiation within 24 h (97% vs. 8%, p < 0.001), similar successful initiation rates (87% vs. 92%, p = 0.34), and shorter lengths of stay (12 [9-18] vs. 18 [14-22] days, p < 0.001). Percutaneous insertion increased the likelihood of successful PD initiation within 24 h (OR 74, 95% CI 31-182), without increasing major complications.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous placement could represent a cost-effective and efficient technique to shorten break-in periods.

Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in Children: Initial Experience with a "2+1"-Port Laparoscopic-Assisted Technique

The placement of a peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) is currently a common procedure in pediatric surgeon practice, and the search for the ultimate technique never stops. The purpose of this study is to evaluate our experience with the laparoscopic PDC placement approach, performing a "2+1" ("two plus one") technique, where the "+1" trocar is placed in an oblique manner, pointing toward the Douglas pouch when passing through the abdominal wall. This tunnel is further used to place and maintain the proper position of the PDC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed a cohort of five children who underwent laparoscopic-assisted PDC placement between 2018 and 2022.

RESULTS

This procedure is a simple, relatively quick, and safe technique for PDC placement. Furthermore, in our experience, concomitant omentectomy is necessary to reduce the risk of catheter obstruction and migration due to omental wrapping.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach allows for improved visualization and more accurate placement of a catheter inside the abdominal cavity. Concomitant omental excision is necessary to prevent PDC malfunction and migration.

Catheter insertion techniques for improving catheter function and clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) relies on the optimal functionality of the flexible plastic PD catheter present within the peritoneal cavity to enable effective treatment. As a result of limited evidence, it is uncertain if the PD catheter's insertion method influences the rate of catheter dysfunction and, thus, the quality of dialysis therapy. Numerous variations of four basic techniques have been adopted in an attempt to improve and maintain PD catheter function. This review evaluates the association between PD catheter insertion technique and associated differences in  PD catheter function and post-PD catheter insertion complications OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to 1) evaluate if a specific technique used for PD catheter insertion has lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction (early and late) and technique failure; and 2) examine if any of the available techniques results in a reduction in post-procedure complication rates including postoperative haemorrhage, exit-site infection and peritonitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 24 November 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining adults and children undergoing PD catheter insertion. The studies examined any two PD catheter insertion techniques, including laparoscopic, open-surgical, percutaneous and peritoneoscopic insertion. Primary outcomes of interest were PD catheter function and technique survival.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias for all included studies. Main outcomes in the Summary of Findings tables include primary outcomes - early PD catheter function, long-term PD catheter function, technique failure and postoperative complications. A random effects model was used to perform meta-analyses; risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) were calculated for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.  MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this review. Nine studies were suitable for inclusion in quantitative meta-analysis (670 randomised participants). Five studies compared laparoscopic with open PD catheter insertion, and four studies compared a 'medical' insertion technique with open surgical PD catheter insertion: percutaneous (2) and peritoneoscopic (2). Random sequence generation was judged to be at low risk of bias in eight studies. Allocation concealment was reported poorly, with only five studies judged to be at low risk of selection bias. Performance bias was judged to be high risk in 10 studies. Attrition bias and reporting bias were judged to be low in 14 and 12 studies, respectively. Six studies compared laparoscopic PD catheter insertion with open surgical insertion. Five studies could be meta-analysed (394 participants). For our primary outcomes, data were either not reported in a format that could be meta-analysed (early PD catheter function, long-term catheter function) or not reported at all (technique failure). One death was reported in the laparoscopic group and none in the open surgical group. In low certainty evidence, laparoscopic PD catheter insertion may make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (4 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.48; I² = 7%), PD catheter removal (4 studies, 257 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.64; I² = 0%), and dialysate leakage (4 studies, 330 participants: RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.49 to 4.02; I² = 0%), but may reduce the risk of haemorrhage (2 studies, 167 participants: RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.31; I² = 33%) and catheter tip migration (4 studies, 333 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.92; I² = 12%). Four studies compared a medical insertion technique with open surgical insertion (276 participants). Technique failure was not reported, and no deaths were reported (2 studies, 64 participants). In low certainty evidence, medical insertion may make little or no difference to early PD catheter function (3 studies, 212 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.83; I² = 0%), while one study reported long-term PD function may improve with peritoneoscopic insertion (116 participants: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.92). Peritoneoscopic catheter insertion may reduce the episodes of early peritonitis (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.71; I² = 0%) and dialysate leakage (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.71; I² = 0%). Medical insertion had uncertain effects on catheter tip migration (2 studies, 90 participants: RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.73; I² = 0%). Most of the studies examined were small and of poor quality, increasing the risk of imprecision. There was also a significant risk of bias therefore cautious interpretation of results is advised.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available studies show that the evidence needed to guide clinicians in developing their PD catheter insertion service is lacking. No PD catheter insertion technique had lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction. High-quality, evidence-based data are urgently required, utilising multi-centre RCTs or large cohort studies, in order to provide definitive guidance relating to PD catheter insertion modality.

A Nationwide Comparative Analysis of Peritoneoscopic and Laparoscopic Techniques for Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion in Brunei Darussalam

KEY POINTS

Peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter insertions are complementary to each other, and each has its niche in a successful peritoneal dialysis program. Future studies need to use standardized definitions to enable comparisons across jurisdictions, and this study is the first to do so.

BACKGROUND

Brunei Darussalam introduced peritoneoscopic insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) as a new method in 2014. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of PDC insertion technique in the country, using proposed standardized definitions of outcomes.

METHODS

This study used retrospective analysis of all PDCs inserted from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, in the country. Outcomes of both peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic insertion methods were analyzed. Four main categories of outcomes were assessed—(1) operative-related outcomes, (2) infective outcomes, (3) mechanical outcomes, and (4) time on peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy.

RESULTS

During the study period, 145 PDCs were inserted: 49 (33.8%) were by peritoneoscopy and 96 (66.2%) by laparoscopy. The median time on PD therapy was 54.2 months. Those with a higher body mass index and history of previous abdominal or pelvic surgery were more likely to undergo laparoscopic method. There was no significant difference in overall infective and mechanical outcomes between the two methods. There was however significantly more postoperative pain observed in the peritoneoscopic group than in the laparoscopic group (8.2% versus 1.0%, P = 0.045). During the study period, there were 49 dropouts to hemodialysis, about half were due to infection. However, there was no statistically significant difference observed in time on PD therapy between the two groups (hazard ratio 0.87 in laparoscopic group compared with peritoneoscopic group, 95% confidence interval, 0.49 to 1.54; P=0.636).

CONCLUSIONS

Peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic PD catheter insertions are both complementary to each other in our local setting. This study has enabled us to scrutinize our PD program, regarding our PDC insertion experience, with the aim to sustain PD growth in the country.

Success rates and safety of a modified percutaneous PD catheter placement technique: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar

BACKGROUND

We modified the blind Seldinger technique by incorporating ultrasound guidance and the use of a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar for PD catheter (PDC) placement, which can be easily performed by a nephrologist and is a feasible technique. To compare success rates and safety of our modified percutaneous PD catheter placement technique to open surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred and twelve stage-5 chronic kidney disease(CKD) patients receiving PD therapy from June 2016 to June 2019 were included, 105 patients treated by ultrasound-guided percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar (Group A) and 107 patients receiving open surgical placement (Group B). Outcomes of patients via either catheter placement technique were retrospectively compared. The clinical success rate as defined by proper catheter drainage within 4 weeks after placement, complication rates (both technical complications and infections), and 1-year catheter survival were compared.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in sex ratio, age, or previous abdominal surgery history between groups (P > .05). Both surgical time and incision length were significantly shorter in Group A than in Group B (P < .05). Clinical success rate was also higher inGroup A (P < .05). Moreover, Group A demonstrated lower overall complication rates (P < .05) and lower incidence rates of early peritonitis, initial drainage disorder, and peritubular leakage (all P < .05). One-year catheter survival was also higher in Group A (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous placement of PD catheters using our modified technique demonstrates superior success rates and safety compared to open surgery. In addition, our modified technique can be a better alternative to traditional Seldinger percutaneous catheterization for its higher success rate and safety, more accurate positioning.

Feasibility of a break-in period of less than 24 hours for urgent start peritoneal dialysis: a multicenter study

Purpose

Urgent start peritoneal dialysis (USPD) is an effective therapeutic method for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, whether it is safe to initiate peritoneal dialysis (PD) within 24 h unclear. We examined the short-term outcomes of a break-in period (BI) of 24 h for patients undergoing USPD.

Methods

This real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort study evaluated USPD patients from five centers from January 2013 to August 2020. Patients were divided into BI ≤ 24 h or BI > 24 h groups. The Primary outcomes included incidence of mechanical and infectious complications. The secondary outcome was technique failure. Moreover, we presented a subgroup analysis for patients who did not receive temporary hemodialysis (HD).

Results

A total of 871 USPD patients were included: 470 in the BI ≤ 24 h and 401 in the BI > 24 h groups. Mechanical and infectious complications did not differ between the two groups across the follow-up timepoints (2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months) (p > 0.05). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that BI ≤ 24 h was not an independent risk factor for mechanical complications, catheter migration, or infectious complications (p > 0.05). A BI ≤ 24 h was not an independent significant risk factor for technique failure by multivariate Cox regression analysis (p > 0.05). The subgroup analysis of patients who did not receive temporary HD returned the same results.

Conclusion

Initiating PD within 24 h of catheter insertion was not associated with increased mechanical complications, infectious complications, or technique failures.

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery Catheter Placement in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes

Introduction

The peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) can be placed either through the laparoscopic technique, percutaneous technique, or surgical procedures. The utilization of these PDC placement procedures is based on the successful placement and reduced risk of development of complications. The main objective of this study was to compare the complications associated with the laparoscopic technique to those linked to open surgery during PDC placement.

Methods

The literature for this review was obtained from the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The literature search was limited to studies published in the period between 1998 and 2019. The meta-analysis was done using Stata Version 12.

Results

The results showed a significant difference in catheter malfunction rates between the laparoscopic and open surgery groups (relative risk [RR] = 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.8, P = 0.031). There was no statistically significant difference in dialysate leakage (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.17, P = 0.116), peritonitis (RR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.6-1.06, P = 0.349), and exit-site infection (RR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.65-1.09, P = 0.834) between two groups.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the laparoscopic PDC placement procedure was superior to open surgery with regard to catheter malfunction.

Does laparoscopic omentectomy reduce CAPD catheter malfunction: A three-arm pilot randomized trial

Introduction:

Catheter malfunction secondary to omental wrapping is a frequent complication of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). Of the various methods of peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion (PDCI), open surgical insertion under local anesthesia is most widely practiced. Laparoscopic omentectomy is often undertaken as a salvage procedure in case of malfunctioning catheters. However, there is no randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the role of prophylactic laparoscopic omentectomy on catheter function. This pilot RCT was undertaken to evaluate the impact of laparoscopic omentectomy on the incidence of catheter malfunction.

Materials and Methods:

Consecutive patients were randomized into three groups: laparoscopic PDCI with omentectomy (Group A), laparoscopic PDCI without omentectomy (Group B) and open surgical PDCI (Group C). The primary outcome was the incidence of catheter malfunction at 6 weeks and 3 months.

Results:

Forty-one patients completed follow-up, with 16, 11, and 14 patients in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Incidence of catheter malfunction was 6.2%, 27.3%, and 14.3% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively, at 6 weeks and 6.2%, 36.4%, and 21.4% at 3 months, respectively. In patients with previously failed catheter insertion (n = 23), malfunction at 3 months was 8.3% (1/12) in patients who had omentectomy, compared with 45.5% (5/11) in those who did not (P = 0.069). Operating time was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in Group A.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic omentectomy may be associated with a lower incidence of catheter malfunction, especially in patients with previously failed peritoneal dialysis catheter. Data from this pilot RCT can be used to design a large trial with an adequate number of patients.

Risk Factors and Management of Catheter Malfunction During Urgent-Start Peritoneal Dialysis

Background: Catheter malfunction is a common complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the risk factors and management of catheter malfunction in urgent-start PD.

Methods: Patients who underwent urgent-start PD were divided into catheter-malfunction and control groups. Baseline demographic and laboratory data of the two groups were compared, and the risk factors for catheter malfunction were analyzed. Primary outcome measure was catheter survival, and the secondary outcomes were surgical complications and malfunction treatment.

Results: Total of 700 patients was analyzed, among whom 143 (20.4%) experienced catheter malfunctions, specifically catheter migration (96, 67.1%), omental wrapping (36, 25.2%), and migration plus omental wrapping (11, 7.7%). Catheter survival time in the malfunction group (202.5 ± 479.4 days) was significantly shorter than that in the control group (1295.3 ± 637.0 days) (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed higher body mass index [hazard ratio (HR), 1.061; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.010–1.115; P = 0.018], lower surgeon count (HR, 1.083; 95% CI, 1.032–1.136; P = 0.001), and higher serum potassium (HR, 1.231; 95% CI, 1.041–1.494; P = 0.036) as independent risk factors for catheter malfunction, while older age (HR, 0.976, 95% CI, 0.962–0.991; P = 0.002) and colonic dialysis (HR, 0.384; 95% CI, 0.254–0.581; P < 0.001) as protective factors. Further subgroup analysis revealed a shorter catheter survival time in patients with younger age ( ≤ 40 years), higher serum potassium levels (≥5 mmol/L), while a longer catheter survival time in patients with colonic dialysis. PD tube and subcutaneous tunnel preservation was successful in 41 out of 44 patients with omental wrapping. All patients had good post-incision prognoses.

Conclusions: Urgent-start PD is safe and effective for unplanned PD patients. Adequate pre-operative colonic dialysis and serum potassium level control are conducive in preventing catheter malfunction. Conservative treatment is effective in managing catheter migration alone, while preservation of the PD tube and the subcutaneous tunnel is effective for omental wrapping.

Abdominal hemorrhage after peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: A rare cause of luteal rupture: A case report

BACKGROUND

Abdominal hemorrhage is a complication of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion that cannot be neglected, and its causes are mainly related to surgical injury. This article reports a case of massive abdominal hemorrhage that was caused by a rare rupture of corpus luteum shortly after PDC during the initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) insertion.

CASE SUMMARY

A 37-year-old woman was surgically placed a Tenckhoff catheter because of end-stage renal disease. On the third postoperative day, the color of the abdominal drainage fluid was pink, and deepened gradually. It turned pale after initiating conservative treatment. On the tenth postoperative day, the color of the abdominal drainage fluid suddenly turned dark red, and the color progressively deepened. The patient’s hemoglobin dropped from 88 g/L to 57 g/L. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) indicated abdominal effusion and a high-density shadow in the abdominal cavity. The surgeon performed a laparotomy and found that the corpus luteum had ruptured on the right side and a left ovarian blood body had formed. The gynecologist repaired the ovary and performed a bilateral oophoroplasty. After the operation, the patient stopped bleeding and hemodialysis was temporarily stopped. PD was resumed after half a month. The patient’s condition improved, and she was discharged 14 d after the laparotomy.

CONCLUSION

If abdominal hemorrhage occurs in women of childbearing age after PDC insertion, luteal rupture should be considered as the cause.

Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines 2019 Part 1 (Position paper of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy)

Approximately 10 years have passed since the Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines were formulated in 2009. Much evidence has been reported during the succeeding years, which were not taken into consideration in the previous guidelines, e.g., the next peritoneal dialysis PD trial of encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) in Japan, the significance of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), the effects of icodextrin solution, new developments in peritoneal pathology, and a new international recommendation on a proposal for exit-site management. It is essential to incorporate these new developments into the new clinical practice guidelines. Meanwhile, the process of creating such guidelines has changed dramatically worldwide and differs from the process of creating what were “clinical practice guides.” For this revision, we not only conducted systematic reviews using global standard methods but also decided to adopt a two-part structure to create a reference tool, which could be used widely by the society’s members attending a variety of patients. Through a working group consensus, it was decided that Part 1 would present conventional descriptions and Part 2 would pose clinical questions (CQs) in a systematic review format. Thus, Part 1 vastly covers PD that would satisfy the requirements of the members of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT). This article is the duplicated publication from the Japanese version of the guidelines and has been reproduced with permission from the JSDT.

Association between different peritoneal dialysis catheter placement methods and short-term postoperative complications

Background

Considering that current peritoneal dialysis has its own shortcomings, In this study, the Seldinger technique was modified to explore the relationship between different catheter placement methods of peritoneal dialysis and short-term postoperative complications.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 157 patients who received peritoneal dialysis in the Department of Nephrology of our hospital from January 2017 to December 2019. According to different catheter placement methods, the patients were divided into three groups: 111 cases of open surgery technique, 23 cases of Seldinger technique, and 23 cases of modified Seldinger technique (ultrasound-guided Veress needle puncture). The general data, laboratory indexes, and abdominal infection and catheter-related complications within one month postoperatively were collected.

Results

There were 48 (31.0 %) cases of complications in 157 patients within one month postoperatively, which were mainly catheter-related complications (45 cases, 29.0 %). The incidence of catheter tip peritoneal drift (catheter migration) in the three groups was 27.3 %, 39.1 %, and 9.1 %, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.069). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that the systolic blood pressure, history of abdominal and pelvic surgery, creatinine, and modified Seldinger technique were possible impact factors of catheter migration (P < 0.10). After fully adjusting for confounding factors, Compared with the open surgery group, the modified Seldinger method group significantly reduced the risk of catheter migration with an OR of 0.161 (95 % confidence interval: 0.027–0.961, P = 0.045); However, the difference between the Seldinger method group and the open surgery group was not significant, with an OR of 1.061 (95 % confidence interval: 0.308–3.649, P = 0.926). Curve fitting showed that the average incidence of catheter migration in the three groups was 27.3 % (95% CI: 15.9-42.7 %), 28.5 % (95% CI: 10.7-56.9 %), and 5.7 % (95% CI: 1.0-27.0 %); the modified Seldinger method has the lowest average incidence of catheter migration.

Conclusions

Modified Seldinger technique can significantly reduce catheter-related short-term complications after peritoneal dialysis, and it is especially effective in reducing the incidence of catheter migration. Modified Seldinger technique is a safe and feasible method for the placement of a peritoneal dialysis catheter.

Laparoscopic versus open-surgery catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: A meta-analysis of outcomes

The peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) can be placed either through the laparoscopic technique, percutaneous technique or surgical procedures. The utilization of these PDC placement procedures is based on successful placement and reduced risk of development of complications. The main objective of this study was to compare the complications associated with laparoscopic vs. open-surgery PDC placement procedure. Literature for this review was obtained from PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The literature search was limited to studies published in the period between 1998 and 2019. The meta-analysis was done using Stata Version 12. The results showed significant difference in catheter malfunction between the laparoscopic and open-surgery group (relative risk [RR] =0.58; 95% CI: 0.42–0.8; P = 0.031). Furthermore, there was no significant statistical difference in dialysate leakage (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51–1.17, P = 0.116) peritonitis (RR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.6–1.06, P = 0.349) and exit-site infection (RR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.65–1.09, P = 0.834) between the laparoscopic and open-surgery PDC placement groups. In conclusion, the laparoscopic PDC placement procedure was superior to open surgery in regards to catheter malfunction. Additionally, the choice of treatment procedure should put in consideration factors such as cost and comfortability of the patient.

Peritoneal dialysis access outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Functional peritoneal dialysis (PD) access is critical to the success of PD therapy. The aim of this review is to describe the spectrum of definitions and methods employed in the measurement of unique outcomes across PD access trials particularly focusing on the outcomes of PD access flow restriction and operative-related outcomes.

METHODS

Using Cochrane CENTRAL registry, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, we searched for studies restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving interventions related to PD access without restrictions on age, language, or publication year. Studies were screened and data abstracted by two independent reviewers. Definitions, outcome measures, and time points of measurements were captured and documented separately. Unique combinations of these variables resulted in reporting the different ways of measurements.

RESULTS

Of the 1768 screened studies, 47 RCTs were included among which 817 PD access outcomes were grouped into 7 broad categories. Interventions evaluated in the RCTs were catheter type/configuration (n = 17), insertion technique (n = 15), multiple interventions (n = 3), and other (6 interventions, n = 12). PD access flow restriction (a subcategory of mechanical outcomes) and operative-related outcomes were reported in 91% and 58% of the included trials, respectively. Tip migration was the most frequently reported flow restriction outcome (59% of RCTs) followed by catheter dysfunction (23% of RCTs). Of the components utilized in definition of flow restriction, description of the impaired flow was reported in 37% of RCTs, need for intervention in 42% of RCTs, and presumed etiology of flow restriction in 60% of RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Variability exists in the definitions, reporting methods, choice of outcomes, and analysis of the PD access outcomes across RCTs. Operative-related outcomes remain underreported across RCTs. Outcomes relating to PD access flow restriction were the most common complications reported in the included RCTs but were reported heterogeneously with variability in reporting of the three key components of its definition including description and severity of the flow restriction, the need for intervention and etiology of flow restriction. In the future, defining PD access flow restriction should include all of these components to better evaluate the comparative effect of various PD access interventions.

Different techniques for peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

The current consensus recommended the peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) techniques based on the patients' anesthesia situation and previous abdominal surgery. However, the research comparing of all the existing PDC techniques is lacking. The objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of PDC techniques by network meta-analysis (NMA). A systematic review of databases was conducted to identify eligible studies. NMA was used to estimate the ranking for endpoints. Our NMA included 41 studies (9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 32 observational trials) and enrolled 3902 patients, comparing three techniques: the laparoscopic catheterization (LC), open surgery catheterization (OSC), and percutaneous catheterization (PC). NMA in RCTs showed OSC had the highest incidence of catheter mechanical dysfunction, PC and LC were very similar, but this result had no statistical difference. NMA in observational studies showed that LC had the highest 1-year catheter survival but without statistical difference (LC vs. OSC: odds ratio (OR) 1.75, 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 0.90-3.40; PC vs. OSC: OR 1.55, 95% CrIs 0.80-2.97; PC vs. LC: OR 0.88, 95% CrIs 0.54-1.44). OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. The complications of leakage, peritonitis, and exit/tunnel infection were inconclusive due to the inconsistent results between RCTs and observational studies. Our NMA revealed LC may have the best 1-year catheter survival. PC and LC might be efficacious in lowering the mechanical dysfunction. OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. More RCTs with larger scale and higher quality are needed in order to obtain more credible evidence.

An analysis of the "Half-Perc" versus open surgical placement method for a peritoneal dialysis catheter: a non-inferiority cohort study

Background

Most end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergo open surgical techniques for peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter placement. An alternative method to PD catheter implantation is the half-percutaneous (“Half-Perc”) technique based on a modified trocar that is performed by a nephrologist. The single-center, retrospective, observational, cohort study presented here aimed to compare the effects of the “Half-Perc” technique with the traditional open surgery on peritoneal catheter insertion.

Methods

From January 2015 to January 2018, 240 ESRD patients who received initial PD catheter placement were divided into two groups based on the “Half-Perc” technique or open surgery. All patients were followed up for 365 days or until loss of initial PD catheter or death. Prism 5 software was used to analyze baseline characteristics, operation-related parameters, mechanical complications and clinical outcomes.

Results

The “Half-Perc” technique showed shorter operation time, shorter incision length, lower postoperative pain scores and quick initiation of the PD program compared to the open surgery. After the 365-day follow-up, the “Half-Perc” group showed a higher rate of catheter dysfunction (4% versus 0.9%) that was corrected by conservative treatment in most patients and a lower rate of peritonitis (4% versus 9.6%) but mechanical complications and clinical outcomes did not differ between the two groups. There was also no significant difference based on overall patient mortality or catheter removal. One-year initial catheter survival and true catheter survival were not statistically different between the groups.

Conclusion

The “Half-Perc” placement of the PD catheter using a modified metal trocar appears to be a non-inferior alternative method and carries minimal invasiveness and risk compared to open surgical placement.

Going Home: Access for Home Modalities

The cost and health burden of ESRD continues to increase globally. Total Medicare expenditure on dialysis has increased from 229 million USD in 1973 to 35.4 billion USD in 2016. Dialysis access can represent almost a tenth of these costs. Central venous catheters have been recognized as a significant factor driving costs and mortality in this population. Home dialysis, which includes peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, is an effective way of reducing costs related to renal replacement therapy, reducing central venous catheter usage and in many cases improving the clinical and psychosocial aspects of patients' health. Addressing access-related issues for peritoneal dialysis, urgent-start peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis can have impact on the success of home dialysis. This article reviews issues related to dialysis access for home therapies.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion using multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar: A modified percutaneous PD catheter placement technique

Background

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound‐guided percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion using multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar.

Methods

A retrospective review of 103 ESRD patients receiving percutaneous PD catheter insertion using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar under ultrasound guidance at a single center between May 2016 and May 2018. Mechanical complications and catheter survival were evaluated over a 12‐month follow‐up.

Result

Catheterization using this technique required only 10‐30 minutes from the beginning of local anesthesia to the end of skin suture at the puncture site (mean 18 ± 7 minutes) and an incision length of 2‐4 cm. Moreover, only four of 103 cases required catheter removal due to poor drainage within one month after surgery, with a success rate of 96.19%. Among failures, omentum wrapping was cause in two cases, catheter displacement in one case, and protein clot blockage in one case, while there were no instances of organ injury, severe hemorrhage, peritubular leakage, hernia, peritonitis, or exit infection within one month of PD catheter insertion. Catheter survival at 1 year was 92.2%.

Conclusion

Percutaneous PD catheter insertion using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar and ultrasound guidance is a feasible technique for ESRD patients.

Randomized controlled trials for comparison of laparoscopic versus conventional open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis

Background

The application of laparoscopic catheterization technology in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients has recently increased. However, the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic versus conventional open PD catheter placement are still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the complications of catheterization in PD patients and to provide a reference for choosing a PD-catheter placement technique in the clinic.

Methods

We searched numerous databases, including Embase, PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane Library, for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Results

Eight relevant studies (n = 646) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed a lower incidence of catheter migration (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.90, P: 0.03) and catheter removal (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.79, P: 0.008) but a higher incidence of bleeding (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.18 to 8.97, P: 0.02) with a laparoscopic approach than with a conventional approach. There was no significant difference in the incidence of omentum adhesion (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.05 to 2.10, P: 0.24), hernia (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.09 to 1.68, P: 0.20), leakage (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.26, P: 0.23), intestinal obstruction (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.91, P: 0.90) or perforation (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.06 to 15.42, P: 0.97). The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in early (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.33, P: 0.15), late (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.90, P: 0.76) or total (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.12, P: 0.13) peritonitis infections between the 2 groups, and there are no no significant difference in early (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.06 to 2.36, P: 0.30), late (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.33, P: 0.16) or total (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.02, P: 0.17) tunnel or exit-site infections between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic catheterization and conventional open catheter placement in PD patients have unique advantages, but laparoscopic PD catheterization may be superior to conventional open catheter placement. However, this conclusion needs to be confirmed with further large-sample-size, multi-centre, high-quality RCTs.

Comparison of the complications of open surgery versus laparoscopic technique in insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter

Background:

Invention of peritoneal dialysis (PD) has opened new windows for patients under dialysis due to its fewer time requirement and being ambulatory in comparison to hemodialysis. Open surgery and laparoscopic technique have been utilized for peritoneal catheter embedding; however, data about the superior technique are controversial. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of open surgery versus laparoscopic technique and compare their complications in those with survival of over and less than a year in patients who need PD for the first time.

Materials and Methods:

This randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 121 cases admitted for PD. Patients were randomly divided into two groups undergoing either open or laparoscopic surgery for embedding PD catheter. Patients’ demographics, as well as PD function and complications, were followed for a 12-month duration and compared between the two groups.

Results:

Catheter survival for over 12 months occurred in 39 patients (65%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 45 (73.8%) patients underwent open surgery (P = 0.09). Complications, including catheter obstruction, leak, abdominal hernia, and peritonitis, were not statistically different between the two techniques over 12 months of survival (P > 0.05). Complications among the catheters with less than a year survival, including obstruction, leak, catheter displacement, hernia, and peritonitis, were not significantly different comparing open surgery with laparoscopic technique (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Considering complications, PD catheter implantation through laparoscopic surgery was not statistically different from open surgery, neither for those with less than 12 months of survival nor for those with over a year.

Catheter type, placement and insertion techniques for preventing catheter-related infections in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritonitis is one of the limiting factors for the growth of peritoneal dialysis (PD) worldwide and is a major cause of technique failure. Several studies have examined the effectiveness of various catheter-related interventions for lowering the risk of PD-related peritonitis. This is an update of a review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of different catheter implantation techniques and catheter types in lowering the risk of PD-related peritonitis in PD patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 15 January 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies comparing different catheter insertion techniques, catheter types, use of immobilisation techniques and different break-in periods were included. Studies of different PD sets were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using a random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two studies (3144 participants) were included: 18 evaluated techniques of catheter implantation, 22 examined catheter types, one assessed an immobiliser device, and one examined break-in period. In general, study quality was variable and almost all aspects of study design did not fulfil CONSORT standards for reporting.Catheter insertion by laparoscopy compared with laparotomy probably makes little or no difference to the risks of peritonitis (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.35; moderate certainty evidence), exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.31; low certainty evidence), catheter removal/replacement (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; low certainty evidence), technique failure (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.08; low certainty evidence), and death (all causes) (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.20; moderate certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether subcutaneous burying of catheter increases peritonitis (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.60; very low certainty evidence). Midline insertion compared to lateral insertion probably makes little or no difference to the risks of peritonitis (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.33; moderate certainty evidence) and may make little or no difference to exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.58; low certainty evidence). Percutaneous insertion compared with open surgery probably makes little or no difference to the exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.30; moderate certainty evidence).Straight catheters probably make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.31; moderate certainty evidence), peritonitis rate (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.21; moderate certainty evidence), risk of exit-site infection (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.34; moderate certainty evidence), and exit-site infection rate (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.43; moderate certainty evidence) compared to coiled catheter. It is uncertain whether straight catheters prevent catheter removal or replacement (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.66; very low certainty evidence) but straight catheters probably make little or no difference to technique failure (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.31; moderate certainty evidence) and death (all causes) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.46; low certainty evidence) compared to coiled catheter. Tenckhoff catheter with artificial curve at subcutaneous tract compared with swan-neck catheter may make little or no difference to peritonitis (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.96; low certainty evidence) and incidence of exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21; low certainty evidence) but may slightly improve exit-site infection rate (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence that any catheter-related intervention, including the use of different catheter types or different insertion techniques, reduces the risks of PD peritonitis or other PD-related infections, technique failure or death (all causes). However, the numbers and sizes of studies were generally small and the methodological quality of available studies was suboptimal, such that the possibility that a particular catheter-related intervention might have a beneficial effect cannot be completely ruled out with confidence.

Outcomes of laparoscopic and open CAPD catheter placement: A single-center experience

Background

Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) catheter placement is typically a straightforward surgical procedure performed on chronically ill patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Post-operative outcomes and reoperative rates vary greatly in the medical literature. We report our experience using both minimally invasive and open techniques in placing CAPD catheters and offer our surgical outcomes.

Methods

This study is an IRB-approved, retrospective review (2005–2018) of all patients undergoing CAPD catheter placement at Mayo Clinic-Rochester. Analysis focused on specific patient outcomes, including early (< 30 days) versus late (≥ 30 days) complication and reoperation rates.

Results

A total of 173 patients with ESRD (mean ASA score = 3.1) underwent laparoscopic (n = 22) and open (n = 151) CAPD catheter placement (mean follow-up = 309 days; range: 1–3497 days). The total index operation complication rate was 41%. The total index reoperation rate was 37% and was similar in open and laparoscopic approaches. CAPD catheters malfunctioned in 19 patients (11% of total) and each underwent reoperation. CAPD catheter infections occurred in 30 patients (17% of total), and 24 required reoperation; 6 patients were treated successfully with antibiotics. CAPD catheter migrations occurred in 21 patients (12% of total) and all underwent reoperation.

Conclusion

Although CAPD catheter placements in patients with ESRD are technically easy to accomplish, the long term outcomes suggest as many as one in three patients will struggle with catheter function or infection. This study has led to changes in our technical CAPD catheter placement procedures, as well as the post-operative patient care algorithm.

•

Open CAPD catheter placement is faster than using a laparoscopic approach

•

One in 3 patients with CAPD catheters will struggle with tube dysfunction or infection

•

Laparoscopic CAPD catheter placement is technically easy to perform

A simple modified open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion procedure reduces the need for secondary surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy of a modified peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion technique for reducing the incidence of mechanical complications.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical data of 346 patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion at our peritoneal dialysis center. The traditional procedure was performed in 157 patients (group A) and the modified procedure in 189 patients (group B). The double-polyester-cuff straight Tenckhoff catheter was used in all patients.

RESULTS

At the end of 1 year, tunnel inflammation was more common in group A (21 patients after 0.011 patient-months follow-up versus 10 patients in group B after 0.007 patient-months of follow-up; p = 0.009). Technical survival rate of the catheter was significantly higher in group B (97.35% in group B vs. 89.81% in group A; p = 0.005). All-cause mortality was not significantly different between the two groups (4.5% in group A vs. 3.2% in group B; p = 0.532). Postoperative mechanical complications were also higher in group A (32 patients [20.4%] in group A vs. 3 patients [1.6%] in group B; p < 0.001). The incidences of complications such as hernia, dialysis fluid leakage, hemorrhage, incision infection, and prolapse of the polyester cuff were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The simple modified peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion procedure decreases the occurrence of catheter migration andomental encapsulation and improves the technical survival rate of the catheter.

Advanced Laparoscopic Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal methodology of establishing access for peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains controversial. Previously published randomized controlled trials and cohort studies do not demonstrate an advantage for 1 technique over another. Four published meta-analyses comparing outcomes of laparoscopic versus open PD catheter (PDC) insertion have given inconsistent conclusions and are flawed since they group basic and advanced laparoscopy together. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine whether advanced laparoscopic interventions consisting of rectus sheath tunneling and adjunctive procedures produce a better outcome than open insertion or basic laparoscopy used only to verify the catheter position.

METHODS

A literature search using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database was performed, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.5 software (Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Outcomes evaluated incidence of catheter obstruction, migration, pericannular leak, hernia, infectious complications (peritonitis and exit-site infection) and catheter survival.

RESULTS

Of the 467 records identified, 7 cohort studies, including 1,045 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. When advanced laparoscopy was compared with open insertion, a significant reduction was observed in the incidence of catheter obstruction (odds ratio [OR] 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03 - 0.63; p = 0.01), catheter migration (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 - 0.26; p = 0.00001), pericannular leak (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 - 0.64; p = 0.003), and pericannular and incisional hernias (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09 - 0.94; p = 0.04), as well as better 1- and 2-year catheter survival (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 - 0.97; p = 0.04 and OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 - 0.92; p = 0.03, respectively). Compared with basic laparoscopy, catheter obstruction and migration were significantly lower in the advanced laparoscopic group, whereas catheter survival was similar in both groups. All outcomes, except catheter obstruction, were similar between the basic laparoscopy and open insertion. The infectious complications such as peritonitis and exit-site infections were similar between the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced laparoscopy was associated with a significant superior outcome in comparison with open insertion and basic laparoscopy.

Wang's Forceps-Assisted Percutaneous Insertion and Fixation of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter

Percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters is theoretically most preferred by nephrologists because of the advantages of bedside performing, surgery independence, and minimal injury over other procedures of catheter placement such as open surgical dissection or laparoscopic operation. However, blindly placing catheters in the percutaneous procedure brings the risk of catheter malposition or bowel perforation; this largely retarded it's implementation. We had previously developed a novel technique termed "Wang's forceps-assisted catheter insertion and fixation," which had been successfully applied in the open surgical catheter insertion and displaced catheter reposition in our center. In this study, we further explored the possibility of applying the Wang's forceps in the procedure of percutaneous catheter insertion both in porcine model and patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD). A total of three miniature pigs successfully received percutaneous catheter insertion using Seldinger's technique with Wang's forceps assistance. The catheters were all placed in the right position and functioning well in dialysate drainage. This novel method of percutaneous catheter insertion was then performed on 20 ESRD patients. The procedure showed effective time-saving with the average operating time of 29.2 ± 3.53 min and was well tolerated by patients with minimal pain and injury. During a follow-up time of 6 months, no complications of catheter displacement, leakage, or blockade occurred. Our preliminary observation demonstrates that utilization of Wang's forceps in a percutaneous procedure conferred benefits of accurately placing and fixing catheters while preserving the merits of minimal invasion and simple performance.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Placement of a Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter and Outcomes: The CAPD I Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the best operation technique, open versus laparoscopic, for insertion of a peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter with regard to clinical success. Clinical success was defined as an adequate function of the catheter 2 - 4 weeks after insertion.

METHODS

All patients with end-stage renal disease who were suitable for PD and gave informed consent were randomized for either open surgery or laparoscopic surgery. A previous laparotomy was not considered an exclusion criterion. Laparoscopic placement had the advantage of pre-peritoneal tunneling, the possibility for adhesiolysis, and placement of the catheter under direct vision. Catheter fixation techniques, omentopexy, or other adjunct procedures were not performed. Other measured parameters were in-hospital morbidity and mortality and post-operative infections.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2016, 95 patients were randomized to this study protocol. After exclusion of 5 patients for various reasons, 44 patients received an open procedure and 46 patients a laparoscopic procedure. Gender, age, body mass index (BMI), hypertension, current hemodialysis, severe heart failure, and previous an abdominal operation were not significantly different between the groups. However, in the open surgery group, fewer patients had a previous median laparotomy compared with the laparoscopic group (6 vs 16 patients; p = 0.027). There was no statistically significant difference in mean operation time (36 ± 24 vs 38 ± 15 minutes) and hospital stay (2.1 ± 2.7 vs 3.1 ± 7.3 days) between the groups. In the open surgery group 77% of the patients had an adequate functioning catheter 2 - 4 weeks after insertion compared with 70% of patients in the laparoscopic group (p = not significant [NS]). In the open surgery group there was 1 post-operative death (2%) compared with none in the laparoscopic group (p = NS). The morbidity in both groups was low and not significantly different. In the open surgery group, 2 patients had an exit-site infection and 1 patient had a paramedian wound infection. In the laparoscopic group, 1 patient had a transient cardiac event, 1 patient had intraabdominal bleeding requiring reoperation, and 1 patient had fluid leakage that could be managed conservatively. The survival curve demonstrated a good long-term function of PD.

CONCLUSION

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing open vs laparoscopic placement of PD catheters demonstrates equal clinical success rates between the 2 techniques. Advanced laparoscopic techniques such as catheter fixation techniques and omentopexy might further improve clinical outcome.

Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion

The success of peritoneal dialysis as renal-replacement therapy depends on a well-functioning peritoneal catheter. Knowledge of best practices in catheter insertion can minimize the risk of catheter complications that lead to peritoneal dialysis failure. The catheter placement procedure begins with preoperative assessment of the patient to determine the most appropriate catheter type, insertion site, and exit site location. Preoperative preparation of the patient is an instrumental step in facilitating the performance of the procedure, avoiding untoward events, and promoting the desired outcome. Catheter insertion methods include percutaneous needle-guidewire with or without image guidance, open surgical dissection, peritoneoscopic procedure, and surgical laparoscopy. The insertion technique used often depends on the geographic availability of material resources and local provider expertise in placing catheters. Independent of the catheter implantation approach, adherence to a number of universal details is required to ensure the best opportunity for creating a successful long-term peritoneal access. Finally, appropriate postoperative care and catheter break-in enables a smooth transition to dialysis therapy.

A contemporary approach to the prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis in children: the role of improvement science

Peritonitis is a leading cause of hospitalizations, morbidity, and modality change in pediatric chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) patients. Despite guidelines published by the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis aimed at reducing the risk of peritonitis, registry data have revealed significant variability in peritonitis rates among centers caring for children on CPD, which suggests variability in practice. Improvement science methods have been used to reduce a variety of healthcare-associated infections and are also being applied successfully to decrease rates of peritonitis in children. A successful quality improvement program with the goal of decreasing peritonitis will not only include primary drivers directly linked to the outcome of peritonitis, but will also direct attention to secondary drivers that are important for the achievement of primary drivers, such as health literacy and patient and family engagement strategies. In this review, we describe a comprehensive improvement science model for the reduction of peritonitis in pediatric patients on CPD.

Outcomes after peritoneal dialysis catheter placement

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to review surgical outcomes after elective placement of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters in children with end-stage renal disease.

METHODS

Children with PD catheters placed between February 2002 and July 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes were catheter life, late (>30days post-op) complications (catheter malfunction, catheter malposition, infection), and re-operation rates. Comparison groups included laparoscopic versus open placement, age<2, and weight<10kg. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen patients had 173 catheters placed (122 open, 51 laparoscopic) with an average patient age of 9.7±6.3years. Mean catheter life was similar in the laparoscopic and open groups (581±539days versus 574±487days, p=0.938). The late complication rate was higher for open procedures (57% versus 37%, p=0.013). Children age<2 or weight<10kg had higher re-operation rates (64% versus 42%, p=0.014 and 73% versus 40%, p=0.001, respectively). Adjusted for age and weight, open technique remained a risk factor for late complications (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.20-4.95) but not re-operation.

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic placement appears to reduce the rate of late complications in children who require PD dialysis catheters. Children <2years age or <10kg remain at risk for complications regardless of technique.

Single port laparoscopic and open surgical accesses of chronic peritoneal dialysis in children: A single center experience over 12 years

INTRODUCTION:

The aim of this study was to evaluate patients with end stage renal failure (ESRD) who underwent chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD). The clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open placements of catheters were compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We reviewed 49 (18 male and 31 female) children with CPD according to age, sex, cause of ESRD, catheter insertion method, kt/V rate, complications, presence of peritonitis, catheter survival rate between January 2002 and February 2014.

RESULTS:

Thirty-three patients were with open placement and 16 patients were with laparoscopic placement. The rate of the peritonitis is significantly less in patients with laparoscopic access than open access (n = 4 vsn = 25) (P <0.01). Patients with peritonitis were younger than those who had no attack of peritonitis (10.95 ± 0.8 years vs 13.4 ± 0.85 years). According to the development of complications, significant difference has not been found between the open (n = 9) and laparoscopic (n = 3) approaches except the peritonitis. Catheter survival rate for the first year was 95%, and for five years was 87.5%. There was no difference between open and laparoscopic group according to catheter survival rate. The mean kt/V which indicates the effectiveness of peritoneal dialysis was mean 2.26 ± 0.08. No difference was found between laparoscopic and open methods according to kt/V.

CONCLUSION:

Laparoscopic placement of CPD results in lower peritonitis rate. Catheter survival rate was excellent in both groups. Single port laparoscopic access for CPD catheter insertion is an effective and safe method.

Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion for the management of pediatric acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute pediatric dialysis is provided by a single center in New Zealand. Most acute dialysis in our center is performed in the under 5 age group. The advantage of using peritoneal dialysis (PD) in these children is the ability to perform continuous renal replacement therapy without always requiring an ICU setting, avoiding central venous access and promoting greater cardiovascular stability. The disadvantage of PD in the acute setting includes the requirement for immediate use and the potential for early leaks due to peritoneal disruption with resulting delayed use and restricted volumes. There is a growing trend toward minimally invasive surgery and the laparoscopic method allows this. Surgeons at this center have been using a laparoscopic technique since 2005.

METHODS

We performed a 10-year review of acute PD at the Starship Hospital from 2003 to 2013. Data on 102 children who met the criteria were collected.

RESULTS

These 102 children had 113 acute PD catheters. The two groups were comparable in terms of age and reason for presentation. The median age of the laparoscopic group was 2 years (interquartile range [IQR] 6) and the open group was 3 years (IQR 3.2). The predominant diagnosis for both groups was hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) accounting for 71% of laparoscopic cases, and 72% of open cases. The incidence of infection was 0% versus 7% in the laparoscopic versus open approach. Ten percent of patients required further manipulation of the catheter after initial insertion in the laparoscopic group, compared with 11% in the open approach. Conversion to hemodialysis (HD) due to catheter-related complications was seen in 10% of laparoscopic cases and 9% of the open cases. Dialysate fluid leak was noted in 26% in the laparoscopic group compared with 11% in the open group (p = 0.08). Anesthesia time is longer in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

We found no significant differences in complication rates between laparoscopic and open surgical approaches regarding acute PD catheter insertion. We saw a trend in increased leakage with laparoscopic procedures and a significantly longer operative time. We concluded that the laparoscopic approach in the acute situation for emergency dialysis is safe and effective.

Analysis of Hospitalization after Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Implantation

♦

BACKGROUND

Implantation of the peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC), usually an elective procedure, may necessitate unexpected hospitalization and even transfer to intensive care due to the multiple comorbidities and inherent instability of the end-stage renal disease patient. Information on hospitalization after PDC implantation is limited and details about the reason for hospitalization are lacking. ♦

METHODS

We performed a cohort study in consecutive patients who underwent PDC implantation at a single institution from September 2007 to September 2013. Clinical characteristics of enrolled patients, technique of the implantation procedure, and all-cause unexpected hospitalization and morbidity within 14 days after implantation were analyzed. ♦

RESULTS

Excluding the patients with pre-arranged admission, a total of 246 patients receiving 252 PDC implantations during the 6 years were studied. After 39 procedures (15.5%), patients had an unexpected hospital stay or re-admission due to operative complications (33.3%), worsening of disease (35.9%), or a single-night hospital stay for observation (30.8%). Compared with discharged patients, the patients with unexpected hospitalization were older (p = 0.001), experienced higher rates of previous episodes of heart failure (p = 0.006) and heart disease (p < 0.001), had more use of general anesthesia (GA) (p = 0.046), underwent more added procedures during the implantation (p = 0.02), and had more episodes of flow obstruction and peritonitis after implantation (p = 0.012 and p < 0.001, respectively). Using a multivariable logistic regression, we showed that age, cardiac morbidity, use of general anesthesia, PDC flow problems and peritonitis after implantation were independent predictors of all-cause unexpected hospitalization. ♦

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time, our study analyzed the predictors of unplanned hospitalization after PDC implantation and identified the salient risk factors. Increased focus to identify patients at greatest risk for hospitalization, evaluation of processes of care, and implementation of preventive strategies may be helpful to reduce unplanned hospitalization after catheter insertion.