Outcomes in buried versus non-buried peritoneal dialysis catheters: A retrospective cohort study

AIMS

To compare the rates of infections (peritonitis and exit site infections) in patients undergoing non-buried versus buried peritoneal dialysis catheterisation for end-stage renal failure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent peritoneal dialysis catheter placement by one primary surgeon between January 2008 and August 2019. Information collected included, catheter characteristics, immediate post-operative complications, date of catheter exteriorisation, date of peritoneal dialysis commencement, rate of successful catheter function at initiation of peritoneal dialysis and rates of catheter-related complications (i.e. infection, revision status and obstruction).

RESULTS

110 peritoneal dialysis catheters were inserted (43 non-buried and 67 buried peritoneal dialysis catheters). The non-buried group was associated with a higher proportion acquiring an infection than the buried group (15% vs 30%, p = 0.054). Patients with buried catheters also had a 72% and 65% decreased likelihood of experiencing a catheter-related infection and peritonitis, respectively, over time compared to patients with non-buried catheters in the unadjusted (crude incidence rate ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.11, 0.70; P = 0.003). The proportion of catheter function at first use was 85% in the non-buried group and 78% in the buried group. Patients with non-buried versus buried catheters had similar proportions of complications, including: obstructions (25.6% vs 20.9%, p = 0.770), herniation (7.0% vs 4.0%, p = 0.327) and leaks (7.0% vs 1.5%, p = 0.134).

CONCLUSION

The use of the buried peritoneal dialysis catheter technique as compared to the standard technique has revealed fewer overall catheter-related infections, particularly episodes of peritonitis and similar rates of mechanical complications in our series. In addition to that, the other benefits of buried peritoneal dialysis catheters such as lower healthcare cost, patient convenience and a viable option for patients in remote communities should prompt physicians to continue assessing suitable candidates for buried peritoneal dialysis catheters.

Intestinal fistula accompanied by recurrent peritonitis associated with peritoneal dialysis: a case report

Background

Intestinal perforation from peritoneal dialysis is rare, but the resulting complications are serious. Some patients do not necessarily have symptoms, and it can be difficult to differentiate their condition from PD-related (peritoneal dialysis-related) peritonitis, which may lead to misdiagnosis. Here we report a peritoneal dialysis patient with intestinal fistula associated with recurrent peritonitis.

Case presentation

A 44-year-old man had been treated for more than 6 years with peritoneal dialysis for chronic kidney disease stage-V. Abdominal computed tomography and electronic colonoscopy revealed an appendiceal fossa with adjacent fistula. The peritoneal dialysis catheter was removed, and the patient recovered with no recurrence of complications.

Conclusion

We report a case of a rare complication of peritoneal dialysis. The intestinal fistula in this patient was mainly caused by recurrent peritonitis and removal of the catheter could control the peritonitis.

Peritoneal dialysis catheter intraluminal fibrin cast: A complication after prolonged placement. Case series with a review of literature and the management of this complication

Peritoneal dialysis is a renal substitutive therapy used in an increasing number of patients with end-stage renal failure as it allows greater freedom to perform daily activities. Peritoneal dialysis catheter obstruction is a significant non-infectious complication of peritoneal dialysis. We describe three cases of peritoneal dialysis catheter obstruction with complete fibrin casts, its surgical management and a review of the literature in management techniques and have proposed an algorithm to guide clinical practise when a complete intraluminal peritoneal dialysis catheter obstruction is suspected.

Minilaparotomy for malfunctioning peritoneal dialysis catheter by nephrologists: experiences at two centers

Catheter malfunction is one of the most important complications of peritoneal dialysis (PD). We have performed minilaparotomy for catheter repair by nephrologists. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the surgery. The surgery was performed 11 times on 10 PD patients with catheter malfunction (3 man, 7 women; mean age 54.3 ± 14.6 years; 4 diabetes, 3 glomerulonephritis, 3 other) at two hospitals. All patients had inflow and/or outflow obstruction. One patient had inserted the PD catheter using conventional surgical technique, and the remaining nine patients had used Moncrief-Popovich technique. Seven patients with catheters embedded using the Moncrief-Popovich technique showed catheter occlusion at the time of externalization. The remaining three patients experienced catheter obstruction 6.0 ± 2.9 months after commencing PD. The cause of obstruction was fibrin in six patients, wrapping by fimbriae of the fallopian tube in two patients, omentum wrapping in two patients. One patient had no blockage in the catheter. Operative time was 97 ± 46 min, and no intraoperative complications were observed. PD was interrupted for 5.9 ± 3.0 days and was resumed without leakage in all patients. However, catheter malfunction recurred in one patient 3 months after the surgery. The mean hospital stay was 22.4 ± 14.7 days. Minilaparotomy by nephrologists is a safety and suitable for the management of catheter malfunction. In addition, it is necessary to always consider the possibility that the catheter has been occluded at the time of externalization in the Moncrief-Popovich technique.

Efficiency and safety of using a peritoneal dialysis catheter weighted with a stainless steel ballast : the Limousin experience

Objective: To assess the recurrence of PD catheter migration after the introduction of a walnut ballast. Materials and Methods: Retrospective study from 1999 to 2014 of PD patients followed in Limousin. Were compared two groups: ballast group (patients who benefited from the establishment of stainless steel ballast at the intraperitoneal catheter extremity) with 26 patients and control group with 204 patients. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of an episode catheter’s migration after ballast’s establishment. Secondary objectives were (i) to determine the causal factors leading to the catheter weighting, (ii) to ensure the safety of the procedure on the following criteria: infectious complications, mechanicals complications, epurations criteria, and catheter’s survival. Results: More than one year after the implementation of the ballast, no recurrent migration was observed in 86.6% of cases. It wasn’t found an increased risk of infections (OR = 0.5, 95% CI [0.22, 1.13]) or mechanical complications (OR = 1.77- 95% CI [0.77, 4.05]) between the two groups. The adequation criteria were similar: KT / V total : 2.37 in the control group and 2.28 in the ballast group (p = 0.63). The survival of the ballast catheter was comparable among the two groups (p = 0.983). Three causal factors that led to the ballast were identified: automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) (OR = 0.38, 95% CI [0.16, 0.9]), the failure from the first use of the catheter (OR = 19.48, CI 95 % [7.67, 49.48]) and the incarceration of the omentum (OR = 15.84, 95% CI [5.81, 43.21]). Conclusion: The ballast used in these study appears to prevent recurrence of migration, without any impact in terms of infectious or mechanical complications, or on the dialysis criteria or on catheter’s survival. However this catheter does currently not have an EC authorization

Successful Initiation of Dialysis with a 20-Year-Old Buried Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter: Case Report and Literature Review

Buried peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters are typically inserted several weeks or months before the anticipated need for dialysis. Occasionally, renal function unexpectedly stabilizes after the surgery, and a patient may go years before the catheter is needed. We report a case of successful initiation of PD with a twenty-year-old buried catheter. We outline the steps needed to optimize the catheter function and review the benefits of the buried PD catheter.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Exit Sites of Buried Peritoneal Dialysis Catheters: A Cohort Study

Buried peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters are placed months before dialysis is needed and the exit site is created when the catheter is dissected out at the initiation of dialysis. In contrast, the exit site of an unburied catheter is created by the surgeon at the time of insertion. We reviewed all patients who initiated PD at our center over a 2-year period. At each clinic visit, exit sites were subjectively classified into standard predefined groups. Outcomes of interest were the frequency of perfect exit sites at 2, 6, and 12 months and rate of exit-site infections (ESIs) at 90 days. One hundred and seventy-seven patients initiated PD during the period of interest, and 169, 157, and 144 remained on PD at 2, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Ninety-three patients had buried catheters, and 76 patients had unburied catheters. Both groups had similar frequency of perfect appearance of exit sites at 2, 6, and 12 months (37/93 vs 41/76 at 2 months; 54/87 vs 43/70 at 6 months; 50/ 81 vs 35/ 63 at 12 months in buried and unburied groups, respectively). More patients with buried catheters had ESIs in the first 3 months (7/93 vs 1/76, p = 0.059). We conclude that exit sites of buried PD catheters do not differ qualitatively from those of unburied catheters. The trend towards more ESIs with buried catheters suggests that there may be clinical consequences of the tissue trauma at time of exteriorization.

Use of the embedded peritoneal dialysis catheter

Introduction The use of embedded peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters is purported to offer numerous benefits over standard placement. However, the optimum period of embedment and the effect of prolonged embedment on subsequent catheter function remain unclear. Methods This retrospective observational study looked at adult patients undergoing embedded PD catheter insertion in a large tertiary referral centre in the UK. Possible predictors for catheter non-function at externalisation were investigated. These included patient factors (age, sex, diabetic status, body mass index, ethnicity, smoking status, previous surgery, estimated glomerular filtration rate), procedural factors (modality of surgery, concurrent surgical procedure), duration of catheter embedment and catheter damage at externalisation. Outcomes examined were proportion of catheters functioning after externalisation, futile placement rate, surgical reintervention rate, infectious complication rate and proportion of externalised catheters lost owing to malfunction. Results Sixty-six catheters were embedded and two-thirds (n=47, 63.6%) were externalised after a median embedment period of 39.4 weeks. Of these, 25 (53.2%) functioned on externalisation. Fourteen (63.6%) of the 22 non-functioning catheters were salvaged. The overall utilisation of PD was 34/47 (72.3%) and the futile placement rate was 12.1%. Over half of the externalised catheters (n=27, 57.4%) were lost directly as a result of catheter related complications, with a median survival time of 39.4 weeks. In adjusted analysis, increasing embedment duration was significantly predictive of catheter non-function at externalisation (adjusted odds ratio: 0.957, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.929-0.985, p=0.003) while subsequent catheter loss was highly dependent on catheter function at externalisation (hazard ratio: 0.258, 95% CI: 0.112-0.594, p=0.001). Conclusions Prolonged embedment of PD catheters is associated with a significantly higher likelihood of catheter dysfunction following externalisation, which is in turn associated with subsequent catheter loss. We have discontinued the use of this technique in our unit.

Abdominal visceral perforation by buried peritoneal dialysis catheters: Cause or coincidence?

Delayed visceral organ perforations after PD catheter insertions are extremely rare. We report two patients who presented with asymptomatic visceral perforation from their buried PD catheters. Five months after a laparoscopic buried PD catheter insertion in a 92-year-old man PD was initiated; bile and bowel contents were noted in the PD effluent. He subsequently expired (from pneumonia) to autopsy revealed the PD catheter within the small bowel. Despite this perforation, there was no evidence of peritonitis, inflammation, nor any bowel content within the peritoneal cavity. A second case was observed 2.5 months after an uncomplicated laparoscopic buried PD catheter insertion in a 60-year-old woman. PD was attempted; the patient had an immediate urge to void. MRI revealed the presence of the PD catheter within her bladder. She underwent PD catheter revision the next day with repair of bladder perforation and ultimately successfully initiated PD. Since the perforations did not occur at the time of catheter placement, we believe that the catheter eroded into a viscus, perhaps related to the lack of a fluid at the catheter - viscus interface. The diagnosis of delayed visceral organ perforation following buried PD catheter insertion may be delayed because the catheter is not immediately used.

Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion

The success of peritoneal dialysis as renal-replacement therapy depends on a well-functioning peritoneal catheter. Knowledge of best practices in catheter insertion can minimize the risk of catheter complications that lead to peritoneal dialysis failure. The catheter placement procedure begins with preoperative assessment of the patient to determine the most appropriate catheter type, insertion site, and exit site location. Preoperative preparation of the patient is an instrumental step in facilitating the performance of the procedure, avoiding untoward events, and promoting the desired outcome. Catheter insertion methods include percutaneous needle-guidewire with or without image guidance, open surgical dissection, peritoneoscopic procedure, and surgical laparoscopy. The insertion technique used often depends on the geographic availability of material resources and local provider expertise in placing catheters. Independent of the catheter implantation approach, adherence to a number of universal details is required to ensure the best opportunity for creating a successful long-term peritoneal access. Finally, appropriate postoperative care and catheter break-in enables a smooth transition to dialysis therapy.

Bowel perforation by a peritoneal dialysis catheter: report of two cases

Background

Complications of peritoneal dialysis (PD) such as pain and catheter leakage are frequently reported. Delayed bowel perforation of a PD catheter is a rare adverse event but a serious complication associated with significant mortality. Bowel perforation of a PD catheter is difficult to differentiate from PD-related peritonitis and likely to result in a delay in diagnosis. Here, we report two cases of bowel perforation after PD catheter insertion by the stepwise initiation of PD using the Moncrief and Popovich technique (SMAP) and peritoneal wall anchor technique (PWAT).

Case presentation

The first case was a 53-year-old woman with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to diabetic nephropathy and a history of entero-adhesiolysis. She underwent PD catheter insertion by the SMAP with PWAT. Four months after PD catheter insertion, the catheter was found to perforate sigmoid colon. The second case was a 57-year-old woman with ESRD due to large polycystic kidney disease. She underwent the same procedure. After exteriorization of the catheter, she developed peritonitis due to perforation of the catheter tip into the bowel. Both patients were safely removed the catheter with uneventful recovery.

Conclusion

We reported two cases of a rare complication of PD catheter. The SMAP method, PWAT, enlarged kidneys and migration of the lower cuff may be risk factors of bowel perforation of a PD catheter.

Embedded Catheters: Minimizing Excessive Embedment Time and Futile Placement while Maintaining Procedure Benefits

BACKGROUND

Embedding peritoneal catheters far in advance of anticipated need may successfully commit patients to their modality choice and reduce central venous catheter use but can be complicated by excessive embedment periods and futile catheter placement.

OBJECTIVE

Embedded catheter outcomes were studied to identify factors that minimize inordinate embedment time and futile placement while maintaining procedure benefits.

METHODS

Clinical and laboratory data were examined in 107 patients with embedded catheters that were either externalized, remained embedded, or were futilely placed.

RESULTS

Externalization of 84 catheters was performed after a median embedment period of 9.4 months. Flow dysfunction occurred in 14.3% of externalized catheters. Overall function rate was 98.8% after laparoscopic revision. One patient changed their mind about modality choice. Except for 1 patient hospitalized acutely in a facility unfamiliar with embedded catheters, none remaining on a peritoneal dialysis pathway initiated dialysis with a central venous catheter. Including catheters with extremely long embedment periods, the incidence of futile placement was 13.1%. Multiple regression analysis identified estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and serum albumin as the 2 variables best associated with catheter embedment duration (r(2) = 0.44, p < 0.0001). Diabetic nephropathy was statistically more likely to be associated with lower serum albumin values (p < 0.0001); however, no association was noted between diabetic status and embedment duration (p = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of the embedment procedure should include appraisal of both eGFR and serum albumin. Appropriate consideration of these values together may help minimize excessive embedment periods and decrease futile placements while preserving procedure benefits.

[Surgical aspects of peritoneal dialysis]

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has wide clinical range since die 70ies. Clinical data report a significantly higher 2 year survival rate for PD compared to patients treated with hemodialysis. Nevertheless, currently only about 10 % of patients suffering from end-stage renal disease are treated with PD. Long-term function of the catheter is based on patient's compliance as well as optimal surgical catheter implantation. Beside the classic "open" surgical approach by mini laparotomy new minimal invasive techniques of catheter implantation were developed during the last years. Advantages of laparoscopic techniques are the possibility for combined intraperitoneal procedures and optimal placement of the catheter. Most of surgery-related complications are caused by leakage or migration, infection is very rare. Several studies did not find an advantage of minimal invasive procedures regarding complications.This review should give an overview on currently established surgical techniques for PD-catheter implantation.

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.

Fluoroscopic manipulation of peritoneal dialysis catheters: outcomes and factors associated with successful manipulation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Mechanical failure of the peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter is an important cause of technique failure. Fluoroscopic guidewire manipulation may be undertaken in an attempt to correct the failure. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of fluoroscopic manipulation of previously embedded PD catheters, the factors associated with successful manipulation, and the complication rate associated with manipulation.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

A single-center, retrospective review of 70 consecutive PD patients undergoing fluoroscopic manipulation for mechanical failure of their PD catheter from June 2006 to February 2011 was undertaken. Logistic regression models were developed to determine the variables associated with successful manipulation.

RESULTS

Of the 70 manipulations, 44 were successful (62.9%). In univariate analysis, catheters located in the pelvis compared with those in the upper abdomen (73.5% versus 42.9%, P=0.01) and catheters that were previously functional compared with those that failed at exteriorization (75.0% versus 46.7%, P=0.04) were more likely to be successfully manipulated. Time embedded, previous hemodialysis, and number of intra-abdominal surgeries were not correlated with likelihood of successful manipulation. In multivariate analysis, catheters located in the pelvis (P=0.01) and those with secondary failure (P=0.01) were more likely to successfully manipulated. Two of the patients developed peritonitis (2.9%), neither requiring cessation of PD.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluoroscopic manipulation is an effective and safe therapy for failed PD catheters that are unresponsive to conservative treatment. Properly positioned catheters and those that were previously functional are more likely to be successfully manipulated.

Peritoneal dialysis versus hemodialysis: risks, benefits, and access issues

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) are dialysis options for end-stage renal disease patients in whom preemptive kidney transplantation is not possible. The selection of PD or HD will usually be based on patient motivation, desire, geographic distance from an HD unit, physician and/or nurse bias, and patient education. Unfortunately, many patients are not educated on PD before beginning dialysis. Most studies show that the relative risk of death in patients on in-center HD versus PD changes over time with a lower risk on PD, especially in the first 3 months of dialysis. The survival advantage of PD continues for 1.5-2 years but, over time, the risk of death with PD equals or becomes greater than with in-center HD, depending on patient factors. Thus, PD survival is best at the start of dialysis. Patient satisfaction may be higher with PD, and PD costs are significantly lower than HD costs. The new reimbursement system, including bundling of dialysis services, may lead to an increase in the number of incident patients on PD. The high technique failure of PD persists, despite significant reductions in peritonitis rates. Infection also continues to be an important cause of mortality and morbidity among HD patients, especially those using a central venous catheter as HD access. Nephrologists' efforts should be focused on educating themselves and their patients about the opportunities for home modality therapies and reducing the reliance on central venous catheter for long-term HD access.

Prolonged Duration of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Embedment Does not Lower the Catheter Success Rate

Objective

Since 2000, we have used the Moncrief–Popovich technique as our standard method for peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion. The subcutaneous portion of the catheter is externalized immediately before initiation of PD. We undertook the present review to investigate whether duration of catheter embedment affects catheter or patient outcome.

Methods

All catheters inserted beginning 1 January 2000 and externalized by 31 December 2008 were included. The primary outcome was catheter survival. Secondary outcomes were catheter patency (no fibrin plug or omental wrap) and complications within 90 days after externalization. A standard peritoneal equilibration test was used to classify peritoneal membrane transport status. Proportional hazards regression models were used to test whether duration of embedment affected catheter outcomes. The models treated embedment duration as both a continuous predictor and a categorical predictor categorized by tertile.

Results

A total of 134 catheters were implanted and externalized. Twelve patients received 2 catheters each. To ensure statistical independence of the observations, 12 of the latter 24 catheters were excluded (1 chosen randomly from each patient), resulting in a useable sample size of 122 catheters. The total duration of observation was 2359 patient–months. The median duration of catheter embedment was 40.5 days (range: 2 – 788 days). After controlling for sex, race, age, and diabetes status, embedment duration did not have a significant effect on catheter survival as a continuous predictor or as a categorical predictor. Additionally, the 95% confidence interval for the 30-day effect of embedment duration ruled out a change of more than 20.6% in the hazard of catheter malfunction or infection. Of the studied catheters, 89.3% were patent and functioned properly immediately upon externalization. The remaining 13 catheters (10.7%) lacked patency on externalization because of fibrin plug or kinking ( n = 10) or omental wrap ( n = 3); however, 12 of the 13 non-patent catheters were corrected laparoscopically, and the patients resumed PD. Only 1 patient transferred to hemodialysis. Overall, 121 of 122 buried catheters (99.2%) were used for PD. Other complications within 90 days of catheter externalization included incision site and tunnel infection in 2 cases (1.6%), exit-site leak in 2 cases (1.6%), and coagulase-negative staphylococcal peritonitis in 1 case (0.8%).

Conclusions

Duration of catheter embedment before externalization did not affect catheter survival and did not influence subsequent peritoneal membrane transport status. The overall effect of increasing embedment duration by 30 days is, at most, a 20.6% increase or decrease in the hazard of catheter failure, but the actual hazard may be much smaller or nonexistent. Larger studies are needed to further explore the ideal duration of embedment.