Laparoscopic assisted placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters for selected patients with previous abdominal operation

Clinical Benefits of Laparoscopic Adhesiolysis during Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: A Single-Center Experience

Background and Objectives: In peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy, intra-abdominal adhesions (IAAs) can cause catheter insertion failure, poor dialysis function, and decreased PD adequacy. Unfortunately, IAAs are not readily visible to currently available imaging methods. The laparoscopic approach for inserting PD catheters enables direct visualization of IAAs and simultaneously performs adhesiolysis. However, a limited number of studies have investigated the benefit/risk profile of laparoscopic adhesiolysis in patients receiving PD catheter placement. This retrospective study aimed to address this issue. Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 440 patients who received laparoscopic PD catheter insertion at our hospital between January 2013 and May 2020. Adhesiolysis was performed in all cases with IAA identified via laparoscopy. We retrospectively reviewed data, including clinical characteristics, operative details, and PD-related clinical outcomes. Results: These patients were classified into the adhesiolysis group (n = 47) and the non-IAA group (n = 393). The clinical characteristics and operative details had no remarkable between-group differences, except the percentage of prior abdominal operation history was higher and the median operative time was longer in the adhesiolysis group. PD-related clinical outcomes, including incidence rate of mechanical obstruction, PD adequacy (Kt/V urea and weekly creatinine clearance), and overall catheter survival, were all comparable between the adhesiolysis and non-IAA groups. None of the patients in the adhesiolysis group suffered adhesiolysis-related complications. Conclusions: Laparoscopic adhesiolysis in patients with IAA confers clinical benefits in achieving PD-related outcomes comparable to those without IAA. It is a safe and reasonable approach. Our findings provide new evidence to support the benefits of this laparoscopic approach, especially in patients with a risk of IAAs.

Peritoneal dialysis patient selection from a comorbidity perspective

Despite many medical and socioeconomic advantages, peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an underutilized dialysis modality that in most countries is used by only 5%-20% of dialysis patients, while the vast majority are treated with in-center hemodialysis. Several factors may explain this paradox, such as lack of experience and infrastructure for training and monitoring of PD patients, organizational issues, overcapacity of hemodialysis facilities, and lack of economic incentives for dialysis centers to use PD instead of HD. In addition, medical conditions that are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as contraindications to PD represent barriers for the use of PD because of their purported potential negative impact on clinical outcomes in patients starting PD. While there are few absolute contraindications to PD, high age, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, polycystic kidney disease, heart failure, and previous history of abdominal surgery and renal allograft failure, may be seen (rightly or wrongly) as relative contraindications and thus barriers to initiation of PD. In this brief review, we discuss how the presence of these conditions may influence the strategy of selecting patients for PD, focusing on measures that can be taken to overcome potential problems.

Hemoperitoneum: Bloody Peritoneal Dialysate in Esrd Patients Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis

Hemoperitoneum is seen in patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) because the PD catheter provides a window to the peritoneum. Gynecological associated phenomena account for the majority of cases. Intra-abdominal pathology of solid organs such as the kidney, liver, and spleen as well as the gastrointestinal tract is recognized. Unique to PD patients, hemoperitoneum may be associated with the catheter itself, uremic bleeding, or peritonitis. A successful PD program requires nephrologists, PD nurses, and patients assess and manage hemoperitoneum in a systematic fashion. This paper reviews hemoperitoneum in adult PD patients.

Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Emplacement by Advanced Laparoscopy: 8-year Experience from a Medical Center of China

Laparoscopic experience and relevant reports about PD catheter emplacement in Chinese patients are seldom. In this study, we described our experience with advanced laparoscopy for PD catheter implantation in Chinese patients. There were one hundred and thirty Chinese patients accepted advanced laparoscopic approach for PD catheter emplacement in this study. Six of 26 patients with prior abdominal operations had abdominal adhesion, while six of 104 patients without prior abdominal surgeries showed abdominal adhesion. Operation time required 10 to 180 minutes. During a mean follow-up time of 26.46 months, the catheter complications were shown as outflow obstruction (n = 6, 4.62%), pericatheter leaking (n = 3, 2.31%), hydrocele of tunica vaginalis (n = 1, 0.77% in all), and umbilical hernia (n = 2, 1.54%). Cumulative revision-free survival probability for catheter loss from mechanical complications at 8 years was 0.95. During the postoperative follow-up ranged between 6 and 106 months, 98 patients (75.38%) were still on CAPD, 17 patients (13.08%) died, 8 patients (6.15%) were transferred to hemodialysis, 6 patients (4.62%) received kidney transplantation, and 1 patient (0.77%) showed improved renal function. These results showed that PD catheter placement with advanced laparoscopy is a safe and effective approach in Chinese patients with or without prior abdominal surgeries.

Laparoscopic techniques enable peritoneal dialysis in the difficult abdomen

Background and Objectives:

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis has become an increasingly popular modality of renal replacement therapy. Laparoscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters may help overcome previous barriers to peritoneal dialysis, such as previous abdominal surgical procedures or the presence of hernias, without incurring substantially greater risks.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective review of 120 consecutive patients who underwent attempted laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter placement between July 2009 and June 2014 by a single surgeon. Patient and catheter characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients with and without complications, as well as between patients with a history of major abdominal surgery and those without such a history.

Results:

Laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter placement was aborted in 4 patients because of an inability to safely achieve sufficient access to the abdominal cavity through dissection; these patients were excluded from subsequent analysis. The mean follow-up period was 18.8 ± 12.9 months. Fifty-five patients had a history of major abdominal surgery compared with 61 without such a history. No significant difference was observed with respect to age, race, sex, or body mass index between groups. Notably, more adjunctive procedures were required in patients with previous abdominal surgery, including adhesiolysis (60.0% vs 4.9%, P < .0001) and hernia repair (12.7% vs 1.6%, P = .026). Postoperative catheter complications were not significantly different between patients with and patients without a history of abdominal surgery (29.1% vs 32.8%, P = .667). Both unassisted (56.8% vs 65.0%, P = .397) and overall (72.7% vs 76.7%, P = .647) 1-year catheter survival rates were similar between patients with and patients without previous surgery, and the overall 1-year survival rate improved to 83.9% on exclusion of patients who stopped peritoneal dialysis for nonsurgical reasons.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter placement offers a chance to establish peritoneal dialysis access in patients traditionally viewed as noncandidates for this modality. Despite the potential risks incurred because of additional procedures at the time of catheter placement in these complicated cases, these patients can achieve good long-term peritoneal dialysis access with an aggressive surgical approach.

Laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion: does it really make a difference?

Permanent peritoneal dialysis (PD) access was first described and introduced in clinical practice more than 40 years ago. It is still undergoing modification and adaptation to various insertion techniques. PD Catheter insertion is commonly performed via one of the three techniques: (a) open surgical, (b) fluoroscopic-guided placement or blind percutaneous placements using a modified Seldinger technique and (c) minimally invasive. Catheter placement is thought to be the key to a successful PD programme and the economic advantages are lost if a patient switches to HD during the 1st year due to failure of PD. The objective of this document was to conduct an evidence-based assessment of a minimally invasive approach to PD catheter insertion, with particular regard to failure rates secondary to catheter dysfunction. Case series and randomised controlled trials suggest that laparoscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters is safe, and useful for insertion of PD catheters in patients who have undergone previous abdominal surgery. An overall success rate of 90% with a less than 5% associated leak rate has been quoted, although a cost benefit analysis has not been performed. However, good grade I evidence is lacking and open surgery may be quicker, though results from on-going trial are awaited with interest.

A novel adaptation of laparoscopic Tenckhoff catheter insertion technique to enhance catheter stability and function in automated peritoneal dialysis

INTRODUCTION

Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) normally takes place overnight. Maintaining a stable PD catheter position, independent of body position, omental wrapping or catheter displacement secondary to bowel movements is essential in maintaining effective catheter function.

METHODS

We developed a new procedure of catheter placement through combining and adapting several previously described operative techniques including laparoscopic placement of a curled double cuff Tenckhoff catheter with subcutaneous tunneling superior to the rectus sheet, an oblique course through the abdominal wall, deep entry into the pelvic peritoneum and directed placement of the curled tip within the pouch of Douglas. Retrospective analysis of catheter function was conducted, evaluating catheter position, function, complication rate and catheter survival against findings for current insertion techniques described within literature.

RESULTS

Between March 2009 and November 2011, 54 patients underwent PD catheter insertion. The observation period was an average of 343 ± 273 days. All patients received abdominal plain film showing optimal catheter position in 89 %. Reported catheter function was very good in 85.2 %, with no or few alarms per week during APD, moderate in 9.3 % with occasional minor dysfunctions (≤ 2 alarms per night), and poor in 5.6 %, with regular alarm disturbance. In one case, primary dysfunction led to catheter replacement. At completion, stable catheter function with occasional minor dysfunction was achieved in 52 of 54 cases. Catheter-related complications (leakage, hydrocele formation, infection and need for replacement) were observed in 14.8 %. At the end of the observation period, 55.6 % of catheters remained in use. Patient dropout occurred through death (18.5 %), renal transplantation (7.4 %), renal recovery (1.9 %), removal secondary to infection or dysfunction (9.3 %) and conversion to HD due to poor dialysis quality (7.4 %).

CONCLUSION

The above technique combines and optimises previously described laparoscopic catheter implantation techniques, allowing increased catheter stability resulting in an undisturbed catheter function suitable for APD.

A brief recap of tips and surgical manoeuvres to enhance optimal outcome of surgically placed peritoneal dialysis catheters

Background. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective option of renal replacement therapy for ESRF, offering advantages over haemodialysis. Peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) placement is thought to be the key to successful PD and the economic advantages are lost if a patient switches to HD in the 1st year. This paper is a brief document elaborating a recap of published literature, looking at various surgical tips and manoeuvres to enhance optimal outcome of PDC placement. Methods. A search strategy assessing for access team, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, type of catheter, catheter exit site, intraoperative catheter trial, optimal time to commence PD, hernia repairs, number of cuffs, catheter-embedding procedures, rectus sheath tunnelling, laparoscopic fixing, omentopexy, omentectomy, the "Y"-Tec system, resection of epiploic appendages, adhesiolysis, a trained surgeon, and perioperative catheter care protocol was used looking at various databases. Findings. The complications of catheterrelated dysfunction can be reduced with advanced planning of access placement, immaculate surgery, and attention to catheter insertion techniques. Conclusion. The success of a peritoneal dialysis programme depends upon functional and durable long term access to the peritoneal cavity; this depends on placement techniques and competent surgeons and psychosocial support to the patient. The various technical tips and manoeuvres elaborated here should be considered options carried out to improve outcome and reduce catheter dysfunction.

Laparoscopic management of malfunctioning peritoneal dialysis catheters

OBJECTIVES

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is an established alternative method to hemodialysis for treating end-stage renal disease patients. Malfunction of the peritoneal catheter is a frequent complication in peritoneal dialysis (PD). Laparoscopy is a minimal invasive technique that allows rescue therapy of malfunctioning catheters and consecutive immediate resumption of PD. The purpose of this study is to present our experiences with laparoscopic repair of peritoneal catheter dysfunction

METHODS

Between April 2006 and March 2010, 21 cases of laparoscopic interventions were performed for the salvage of malfunctioning CAPD catheter. Two trocars (5 mm) were used. Recorded data included patient demographics, catheter implantation method, date of malfunction, cause of dysfunction, procedure performed and complications.

RESULTS

The primary etiology of dysfunction was omentum and/or small bowel wrapping with adhesions in fifteen cases, malpositioning in four cases, and tunnel infection in the remaining two cases. Adhesiolysis was performed in cases with adhesions. In the cases with malpositioning but no adhesions, the catheters were repositioned in the pelvic cavity. Two catheters had to be withdrawn and exchanged because of infection. There were no mechanical or infection problems. The overall success rate of catheter function (>30 days after laparoscopy) was 100%, except for two cases in which the catheters had to be removed.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is a safe, highly effective and successful method for the evaluation and management of peritoneal dialysis catheter dysfunction.

The Effects of Previous Abdominal Operations and Intraperitoneal Adhesions on the Outcome of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheters

Background

Patients with previous history of abdominal operations are sometimes excluded from consideration for peritoneal dialysis because of concerns for increased risk of complications during the implantation procedure and inadequate dialysis due to reduced peritoneal surface area. Employing a laparoscopic approach, we compared the outcome of peritoneal dialysis catheters in 2 groups of patients with and without intra-abdominal adhesions.

Methods

All data in this report were recorded prospectively. Revision-free and overall survival of catheters, the incidence of mechanical and infectious complication, and surgical revision rates were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

In 217 successful catheter implantations, there was a history of previous abdominal surgery in 42.9% of procedures; only 26.9% of them had intraperitoneal adhesions; 2.8% of patients without history of previous abdominal surgery had intraperitoneal adhesions. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups for 1- and 2-year revision-free and overall catheter survival, mechanical dysfunction, infectious complications, or surgical revision rates.

Conclusion

History of previous abdominal surgery should not be used to judge the eligibility of patients for peritoneal dialysis. Laparoscopic placement is the best way to ensure optimal catheter outcomes equivalent to patients without previous abdominal surgery.

Effect of Prior Abdominal Surgery, Peritonitis, and Adhesions on Catheter Function and Long-Term Outcome on Peritoneal Dialysis

Adhesions from previous surgery and peritonitis can lead to peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion failure, visceral injury, and poor dialysis function. Employing a laparoscopic approach, the effect of adhesiolysis on mechanical catheter complications and long-term catheter survival was prospectively examined in 436 catheter placement procedures having a 57.8 per cent prevalence rate of previous surgery. Adhesiolysis was required in 31.8 per cent of cases with prior surgery and in 3.3 per cent of procedures without previous operations. The incidence of adhesiolysis was directly related to the number of prior surgeries ( P < 0.0001). The incidence of catheter insertion failure from extensive adhesions was 1.8 per cent. Survival probability free from catheter obstruction was lower in patients requiring adhesiolysis compared with subjects with prior surgery not requiring adhesiolysis ( P = 0.01). Laparoscopic rescue procedures limited catheter losses from flow obstruction to only 0.7 per cent. As a result, long-term catheter survival was not different among patients regardless of prior surgery and/or adhesion status ( P = 0.2). Scars on the abdomen and prior peritonitis do not predict the extent of adhesions and should not be used to judge eligibility for peritoneal dialysis. Presently, laparoscopy is the only practical way to provide optimal peritoneal access in patients with a history of surgery and peritonitis.

Videolaparoscopy as rescue therapy and placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a thirty-two case single centre experience

BACKGROUND

Malfunction of the peritoneal catheter is a frequent complication in peritoneal dialysis (PD). Videolaparoscopy is a minimal invasive technique that allows rescue therapy of malfunctioning catheters and consecutive immediate resumption of PD. Furthermore, Tenckhoff catheters can be safely positioned in patients with previous abdominal surgery. We analysed the clinical diagnosis, videolaparoscopic treatment and the outcome of PD patients on whom videolaparoscopic interventions had been performed at our centre.

METHODS

Thirty-two cases of videolaparoscopic interventions were performed for salvage of malfunctioning peritoneal catheters, implantation and abdominal surgical interventions in 25 PD patients. The videolaparoscope was inserted through a mini-laparotomy site of 15 mm diameter which was closed with purse-string sutures at the end of the intervention.

RESULTS

Videolaparoscopy was used in 21 cases of catheter malfunction mostly due to omental wrapping (12 cases) and dislocation (five cases). In eight patients with previous surgical abdominal interventions, laparoscopic placement of the PD catheter was performed. In two cases the gall bladder was removed. One case of intestinal occlusion was evaluated laparoscopically in an attempt to minimize invasive surgery. Leakage of the peritoneal fluid presented the only complication caused by insufficient closure of one mini-laparotomy site. Minimal follow-up time of rescued catheters was 5 months. Videolaparoscopy prolonged PD catheter function by a median of 163 days (range 5-1469 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Videolaparoscopy prolongs peritoneal catheter survival by treating directly the causes of malfunction. In patients with preceding abdominal interventions, the PD catheter can be placed safely even in cases necessitating surgical preparation like adhesiolysis.