Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Outcomes of fluoroscopic and ultrasound-guided placement versus laparoscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters.
Abdel Aal, Ahmed K; Guest, Steven S; Moawad, Sherif; Mahmoud, Khalid; Jackson, Bradford; Rageeb, Peter M; Shawali, Islam H; Mokhtar, Asmaa E; Hamed, Basant F; Attia, Doaa; Ertel, Nathan; Almehmi, Ammar.
Affiliation
  • Abdel Aal AK; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Guest SS; Renal Division, Baxter Healthcare, McGaw Park, IL, USA.
  • Moawad S; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Mahmoud K; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Jackson B; Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Rageeb PM; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Shawali IH; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Mokhtar AE; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Hamed BF; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Attia D; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Ertel N; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
  • Almehmi A; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Clin Kidney J ; 11(4): 549-554, 2018 Aug.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30094020
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Several peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) placement techniques have been described. The objective of this study was to compare the fluoroscopy and ultrasound guidance technique with the laparoscopic technique.

METHODS:

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who had their first PDC placed between January 2005 and June 2016. We compared the outcomes of the fluoroscopic and ultrasound-guided catheter placement technique (radiologic group, n = 50) with the laparoscopic catheter placement technique (laparoscopic group, n = 190). The primary endpoint was complication-free catheter survival at 365 days. Secondary endpoints were complication-free catheter survival at 90 days, overall catheter survival at 90 and 365 days, median days to first complication and median days to catheter removal.

RESULTS:

In the radiologic group, the complication-free catheter survival at 90 and 365 days was 64% and 48%, respectively, while in the laparoscopic group it was 71% (P = 0.374) and 53% (P = 0.494), respectively. Catheter malfunction was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group (30%) compared with the radiologic group (16%, P = 0.048). The overall catheter survival at 90 and 365 days was 76% and 52%, respectively, in the radiologic group, while in the laparoscopic group it was 88% (P = 0.0514) an 48% (P = 0.652), respectively. There was no significant difference in the median days to first complication and the median days to catheter removal between the two groups (P = 0.71).

CONCLUSION:

The technique of fluoroscopic and ultrasound-guided PDC placement is a clinically effective and safe alternative to laparoscopic catheter placement with similar survival and complication rates.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Guideline Language: En Journal: Clin Kidney J Year: 2018 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Guideline Language: En Journal: Clin Kidney J Year: 2018 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States