Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A retrospective cohort study.
J Vasc Access
; 20(3): 307-312, 2019 May.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-30345873
BACKGROUND: The main limitations of central venous catheters for haemodialysis access are infections and catheter malfunction. Our objective was to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters are comparable to tunnelled central venous catheters in terms of infection and catheter malfunction and to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled catheters are superior to straight catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, observational cohort study, adult patients in whom a central venous catheter for haemodialysis was inserted between 2012 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was a combined endpoint consisting of the first occurrence of either an infection or catheter malfunction. The secondary endpoint was a combined endpoint of the removal of the central venous catheter due to either an infection or a catheter malfunction. Using multivariable analysis, cause-specific hazard ratios for endpoints were calculated for tunnelled catheter versus precurved non-tunnelled catheter, tunnelled catheter versus non-tunnelled catheter, and precurved versus straight non-tunnelled catheter. RESULTS: A total of 1603 patients were included. No difference in reaching the primary endpoint was seen between tunnelled catheters, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.19, p = 0.48). Tunnelled catheters were removed less often, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.93; p = 0.02). A trend for less infections and catheter malfunctions was seen in precurved jugular non-tunnelled catheters compared to straight non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-1.50; p = 0.28) and were removed less often (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.93; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Tunnelled central venous catheters and precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters showed no difference in reaching the combined endpoint of catheter-related infections and catheter malfunction. Tunnelled catheters get removed less often because of infection/malfunction than precurved non-tunnelled catheters.
Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Cateterismo Venoso Central
/
Cateteres de Demora
/
Diálise Renal
/
Falha de Equipamento
/
Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter
/
Cateteres Venosos Centrais
Tipo de estudo:
Diagnostic_studies
/
Etiology_studies
/
Observational_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
Limite:
Aged
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
/
Middle aged
País/Região como assunto:
Europa
Idioma:
En
Ano de publicação:
2019
Tipo de documento:
Article