Embedded Catheters: Minimizing Excessive Embedment Time and Futile Placement while Maintaining Procedure Benefits

Optimizing peritoneal dialysis catheter placement

Long-term success of peritoneal dialysis as a kidney replacement therapy requires a well-functioning peritoneal dialysis catheter. With ongoing reductions in infectious complications, there is an increased emphasis on the impact of catheter-related and mechanical complications. There is currently a marked variation in the utilization of various types of catheters (double cuff vs single cuff, coiled tip vs straight tip), methods of catheter insertion (advanced laparoscopic, open surgical dissection, image guided percutaneous, blind percutaneous), timing of catheter insertion, location of catheter placement (pre-sternal v. abdominal) and peri-operative practices. Specialized approaches to catheter placement in clinical practice include use of extended catheters and embedded catheters. Marked variations in patient lifestyle preferences and comorbidities, specifically in high acuity patient populations (polycystic kidney disease, obesity, cirrhosis) necessitate individualized approaches to catheter placement and care. Current consensus guidelines recommend local procedural expertise, consideration of patient characteristics and appropriate resources to support catheter placement and long-term functioning. This review focuses on an overview of approaches to catheter placement with emphasis on a patient-centered approach.

A Peritoneal Dialysis Access Quality Improvement Initiative: A Single-Center Experience

Background:Little evidence exists regarding optimal peritoneal dialysis (PD) access insertion pathways, benchmarking for patency targets, and definitions of access dysfunction.Methods:This quality improvement (QI) project evaluated patients with PD catheters inserted at a single center in Toronto, Canada, following: establishment of PD catheter insertion protocols, a PD access coordinator, PD access operator training, and outcomes reporting. We define primary vs secondary PD catheter dysfunction by presentation before/after initial home PD treatment. We report catheter dysfunction rates, interventions restoring PD catheter patency (interventional radiology [IR] vs advanced laparoscopic [AL]) (embedded vs non-embedded) between 2012 and 2017.Results:A total of 297 first PD catheters were inserted between January 2012 and December 2017. Interventional radiology PD catheters (n = 94) were placed in older patients with greater comorbidities and less prior abdominal surgery than AL-placed catheters. Indications for IR insertion included need for urgent dialysis given resource availability (36.2% [n = 34]) and prohibitive surgical risk (26.6% [n = 25]). Interventional radiology-inserted catheters had overall (primary and secondary) dysfunction rates of 17%. Non-embedded AL catheters had 16.1% overall dysfunction. Embedded AL-inserted PD catheters had a 24.6% overall dysfunction rate. Among all dysfunctional catheters, IR manipulation was successful in 31% (n = 11), and surgical revision was necessary in all unsuccessful cases with either lysis of adhesions or omentopexy to establish patency.Conclusion:Our PD catheter QI initiative involved tracking, outcome reporting, defining PD catheter dysfunction and PD access insertion pathway development, yielding important insights into opportunities for program improvement. Multicenter research initiatives are needed to further improve PD access dysfunction definitions and to establish the best benchmarks for these metrics.

Peritoneal Dialysis: Turning Choice into Reality

Background

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) utilization rates vary widely between UK renal centers. Currently there are only limited data available on how many patients choose PD but subsequently fail to start their chosen modality. In the current analysis we sought to explore the outcomes of patients who chose PD in our center where all PD catheters are inserted via a mini-laparotomy with no acute-start PD service.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of 658 patients over a 12-year period who, following predialysis education had chosen PD as their preferred renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality. Data were collected on patient demographics, start modality, transplantation, patient survival, and the reasons patients failed to start PD.

Results

Predialysis education was given to 2,749 patients, and 658 (24%) chose PD. Of the 566 (86%) who either started RRT or died, less than half started PD ( n = 273, 48%). The commonest reason to start hemodialysis (HD) was an acute decline in kidney function leading to an effective ‘unplanned’ start on RRT. As a result, despite adjusting for older age and higher comorbidity, the transplant-censored survival at 3 years from the time of start of RRT was predictably worse in patients starting HD. Less than half the patients who started HD went on to commence PD later.

Conclusion

Unanticipated decline in kidney function leading to unplanned start on HD contributes to the worse outcomes associated with failing to start PD. How and when we insert PD catheters appears to be key, and we have identified ways to improve our service.

Use of the embedded peritoneal dialysis catheter

Introduction The use of embedded peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters is purported to offer numerous benefits over standard placement. However, the optimum period of embedment and the effect of prolonged embedment on subsequent catheter function remain unclear. Methods This retrospective observational study looked at adult patients undergoing embedded PD catheter insertion in a large tertiary referral centre in the UK. Possible predictors for catheter non-function at externalisation were investigated. These included patient factors (age, sex, diabetic status, body mass index, ethnicity, smoking status, previous surgery, estimated glomerular filtration rate), procedural factors (modality of surgery, concurrent surgical procedure), duration of catheter embedment and catheter damage at externalisation. Outcomes examined were proportion of catheters functioning after externalisation, futile placement rate, surgical reintervention rate, infectious complication rate and proportion of externalised catheters lost owing to malfunction. Results Sixty-six catheters were embedded and two-thirds (n=47, 63.6%) were externalised after a median embedment period of 39.4 weeks. Of these, 25 (53.2%) functioned on externalisation. Fourteen (63.6%) of the 22 non-functioning catheters were salvaged. The overall utilisation of PD was 34/47 (72.3%) and the futile placement rate was 12.1%. Over half of the externalised catheters (n=27, 57.4%) were lost directly as a result of catheter related complications, with a median survival time of 39.4 weeks. In adjusted analysis, increasing embedment duration was significantly predictive of catheter non-function at externalisation (adjusted odds ratio: 0.957, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.929-0.985, p=0.003) while subsequent catheter loss was highly dependent on catheter function at externalisation (hazard ratio: 0.258, 95% CI: 0.112-0.594, p=0.001). Conclusions Prolonged embedment of PD catheters is associated with a significantly higher likelihood of catheter dysfunction following externalisation, which is in turn associated with subsequent catheter loss. We have discontinued the use of this technique in our unit.