Stack M, Price N, Ronaldson J, Prestidge C, Wong W, Kara T. Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion for the management of pediatric acute kidney injury.
Pediatr Nephrol 2016;
31:297-303. [PMID:
26432705 DOI:
10.1007/s00467-015-3221-4]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2015] [Revised: 09/01/2015] [Accepted: 09/15/2015] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Acute pediatric dialysis is provided by a single center in New Zealand. Most acute dialysis in our center is performed in the under 5 age group. The advantage of using peritoneal dialysis (PD) in these children is the ability to perform continuous renal replacement therapy without always requiring an ICU setting, avoiding central venous access and promoting greater cardiovascular stability. The disadvantage of PD in the acute setting includes the requirement for immediate use and the potential for early leaks due to peritoneal disruption with resulting delayed use and restricted volumes. There is a growing trend toward minimally invasive surgery and the laparoscopic method allows this. Surgeons at this center have been using a laparoscopic technique since 2005.
METHODS
We performed a 10-year review of acute PD at the Starship Hospital from 2003 to 2013. Data on 102 children who met the criteria were collected.
RESULTS
These 102 children had 113 acute PD catheters. The two groups were comparable in terms of age and reason for presentation. The median age of the laparoscopic group was 2 years (interquartile range [IQR] 6) and the open group was 3 years (IQR 3.2). The predominant diagnosis for both groups was hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) accounting for 71% of laparoscopic cases, and 72% of open cases. The incidence of infection was 0% versus 7% in the laparoscopic versus open approach. Ten percent of patients required further manipulation of the catheter after initial insertion in the laparoscopic group, compared with 11% in the open approach. Conversion to hemodialysis (HD) due to catheter-related complications was seen in 10% of laparoscopic cases and 9% of the open cases. Dialysate fluid leak was noted in 26% in the laparoscopic group compared with 11% in the open group (p = 0.08). Anesthesia time is longer in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.008).
CONCLUSION
We found no significant differences in complication rates between laparoscopic and open surgical approaches regarding acute PD catheter insertion. We saw a trend in increased leakage with laparoscopic procedures and a significantly longer operative time. We concluded that the laparoscopic approach in the acute situation for emergency dialysis is safe and effective.
Collapse