Yonsei Med J.  2015 Jul;56(4):981-986. 10.3349/ymj.2015.56.4.981.

Modified Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: Comparison with a Conventional Method

• Lee YK
• Yang PS
• Park KS
• Choi KH
• Kim BS

• KMID: 2366338
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2015.56.4.981

Abstract

PURPOSE
The conventional trocar and cannula method in peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion has its limitation in clinical setting. The aim of this study was to compare a modified method for percutaneous PD catheter insertion with the conventional method, and demonstrate advantages of the modified method.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients at a single center who had percutaneous PD catheters inserted by nephrologists from January 2006 until September 2012, using either a modified method (group M) or the conventional trocar and cannula method (group C), were retrospectively analyzed, in terms of baseline characteristics, complications experienced up to 3 months after the procedure, and the suitability of the procedure for patients.
RESULTS
Group M included 82 subjects, while group C included 66 cases. The overall early complication rate in group M (1.2%) was significantly lower than that in group C (19.7%) (p<0.001). The catheter revision rate during timeframe for early complications was significantly lower in group M (0%) than in group C (6.1%) (p=0.024). When comparing Procedure time (1 h 3 min+/-16 min vs. 1 h 36 min+/-19 min, p<0.01), immediate post-procedural pain (2.43+/-1.80 vs. 3.14+/-2.07, p<0.05), and post-procedure days until ambulation (3.95+/-1.13 days vs. 6.17+/-1.34 days, p<0.01), group M was significantly lower than group C. There was no significant difference in total hospitalization period (14.71+/-7.05 days vs. 13.86+/-3.7 days).
CONCLUSION
Our modified PD catheter insertion method shows its advantages in early complication rate, early complications revision rate, and the patients' conveniences.

Keyword

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis; peritoneal catheter insertion; nephrologists; modified method; trocar and cannula method; complication rate

MeSH Terms

Adult
Aged
*Catheters, Indwelling
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Peritoneal Dialysis/instrumentation/*methods
Retrospective Studies
Surgical Instruments
Treatment Outcome
Urinary Catheterization/*instrumentation/methods
Young Adult

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 The modified method of peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. (A) Abdomen is penetrated by mosquito hemostat. The hemostat is clenched during insertion and spread during removal to ensure appropriate opening. (B) More detailed schematics of the procedure. After making an incision in the anterior rectus sheath, a mosquito hemostat is inserted along the grain of the rectus muscle until it reaches the posterior rectus sheath. After puncturing the posterior rectus sheath and the peritoneum, the hemostat is removed while being spread to minimize muscle injury and to ensure an opening that is wide enough for the insertion of the Tenckhoff catheter.

Reference

1. Asif A, Byers P, Gadalean F, Roth D. Peritoneal dialysis underutilization: the impact of an interventional nephrology peritoneal dialysis access program. Semin Dial. 2003; 16:266–271.

2. Chandna SM, Farrington K. Residual renal function: considerations on its importance and preservation in dialysis patients. Semin Dial. 2004; 17:196–201.

3. Rottembourg J. Residual renal function and recovery of renal function in patients treated by CAPD. Kidney Int Suppl. 1993; 40:S106–S110.

4. Rottembourg J, Issad B, Allouache M, Jacobs C. Recovery of renal function in patients treated by CAPD. Adv Perit Dial. 1989; 5:63–66.

5. Asif A, Pflederer TA, Vieira CF, Diego J, Roth D, Agarwal A. Does catheter insertion by nephrologists improve peritoneal dialysis utilization? A multicenter analysis. Semin Dial. 2005; 18:157–160.

6. Hingwala J, Diamond J, Tangri N, Bueti J, Rigatto C, Sood MM, et al. Underutilization of peritoneal dialysis: the role of the nephrologist's referral pattern. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013; 28:732–740.

7. Moreiras Plaza M, Cuíña L, Goyanes GR, Sobrado JA, Gonzalez L. Mechanical complications in chronic peritoneal dialysis. Clin Nephrol. 1999; 52:124–130.

8. Basile B, De Padova F, Parisi A, Montanaro A, Giordano R. Routine insertion of permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters in the nephrology ward. The sliding percutaneous technique. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2004; 56:359–365.

9. Smith SA, Morgan SH, Eastwood JB. Routine percutaneous insertion of permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters on the nephrology ward. Perit Dial Int. 1994; 14:284–286.

10. Zappacosta AR, Perras ST, Closkey GM. Seldinger technique for Tenckhoff catheter placement. ASAIO Trans. 1991; 37:13–15.

11. Ozener C, Bihorac A, Akoglu E. Technical survival of CAPD catheters: comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2001; 16:1893–1899.

12. Adamson AS. Factors influencing peritoneal catheter survival in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1991; 73:131.

13. Allon M, Soucie JM, Macon EJ. Complications with permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters: experience with 154 percutaneously placed catheters. Nephron. 1988; 48:8–11.

14. Jo YI, Shin SK, Lee JH, Song JO, Park JH. Immediate initiation of CAPD following percutaneous catheter placement without break-in procedure. Perit Dial Int. 2007; 27:179–183.

15. Henderson S, Brown E, Levy J. Safety and efficacy of percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters under sedation and local anaesthetic. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009; 24:3499–3504.