Placement of tunneled cuffed catheter for hemodialysis: Micropuncture kit versus Angiocath IV catheter.

INTRODUCTION: Tunneled cuffed catheters provide stable, instantaneous, long-term intravenous access for hemodialysis. Because catheterization is often performed in emergency situations, speed and accuracy are emphasized. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the Micropuncture kit with the standard 18-gauge Angiocath IV catheter for tunneled cuffed catheter insertion in the right jugular vein. From June 2016 to May 2017, 31 tunneled cuffed catheters were successfully inserted via the Micropuncture kit and another 31 via the Angiocath IV catheter. All patients underwent the same ultrasound-guided procedure performed by a single experienced interventionalist. Procedure time was the time from draping of the patient to the completion of povidone dressing after the catheterization. In our center, the Angio Lab nurse maintains records, including procedure time and method for every procedure. All patient records were retrospectively tracked through electronic medical record review. The primary outcome was procedure time and the secondary outcomes were complications and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the patients' demographic data between the two groups. However, procedure time was significantly shorter in the Angiocath group than in the Micropuncture group (12.4 ± 3.5 vs 17.6 ± 6.9 min, p = 0.001); there were no serious complications, such as hemorrhage, pneumothorax, or hematoma, in both groups. Moreover, cost-effectiveness was better in the Angiocath group than in the Micropuncture group (0.34 vs 52 US$, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Using the Angiocath IV catheter can reduce procedure time and cost with no severe complications. Moreover, experienced practitioners can reduce the risk of complications when using Angiocath. There are several limitations to this study. First, it was retrospective; second, it was not randomized; and finally, it was conducted by only one experienced interventionalist.

Causative Agents of Drug-Induced Pancreatitis: A Nationwide Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze causes of drug-induced acute pancreatitis (DIAP) in Korea and factors associated with serious DIAP. METHODS: Case records of DIAP voluntarily reported to the Korea Adverse Event Reporting System from 2004 to 2013 were reviewed. When a patient took 2 or more drugs, each drug was identified as a potential cause. The seriousness of each case was determined based on the International Conference on Harmonization E2D Guideline. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with the seriousness of DIAP. RESULTS: During the study period, 210 (0.05%) of 442,523 adverse event reports were (0.05%) DIAP. The most common causative medication of the DIAP cases with certain, probable/likely, and possible causality (n = 74) was L-asparaginase (n = 18), followed by azathioprine (n = 6), methylprednisolone (n = 6), and fenofibrate (n = 5). Serious events occurred in 43 cases (58%) with certain, probable/likely, and possible causality. They were significantly associated with the year of report (odds ratio, 0.572; P = 0.025) and the number of concurrently used medications (odds ratio, 2.659; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: L-Asparaginase is the most common cause of DIAP in Korea. Serious DIAP is more likely to occur in patients taking multiple medications.

A population-based case-crossover study of polyethylene glycol use and acute renal failure risk in the elderly.

AIM: To evaluate the possibility of an association between polyethylene glycol (PEG) and acute renal failure (ARF) in elderly patients using a health insurance claims database. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-crossover study using information obtained from Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) claims from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005 (Seoul, Korea). The study population consisted of elderly patients who received PEG prior to experiencing their first ARF-related hospitalization from April 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005. For each patient, one case and two control periods were matched. PEG use in a 2- or 4-wk window period prior to hospitalization for ARF was compared with PEG use in two earlier 2- or 4-wk control window periods. Conditional logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI, adjusting for concomitant uses of diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antibiotics, anti-cancer drugs, and contrast media. RESULTS: Within the HIRA database which contained 1,093,262 elderly patients, 1156 hospitalized ARF cases were identified. Among these cases, PEG was prescribed to 17 (1.5%) patients before hospitalization. The adjusted ORs when applying the 2- and 4-wk window periods were 0.4 (95% CI: 0.03-5.24) and 2.1 (95% CI: 0.16-27.78), respectively. CONCLUSION: No increased risk of ARF was found in elderly PEG users. However, based on the limited number of study subjects, further analysis should be performed to confirm these results.