Delayed intestinal perforation associated with peritoneal dialysis: A case report of maintaining dialysis after perforation

Delayed intestinal perforation has various manifestations. For peritonitis with delayed treatment and multi-bacterial peritonitis, we should be alert to the occurrence of this rare complication. Abdominal CT examination and imaging results judgment based on clinical conditions are particularly important for diagnosis. Delayed intestinal perforation of peritoneal dialysis catheter is a rare but serious complication. We reported a 49-year-old patient who had been hospitalized twice within 3 months due to poor drainage of the peritoneal dialysis catheter. During the first hospitalization, peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis was diagnosed, and a variety of bacterial infections were cultivated. However, at that time, the actual peritoneal dialysis catheter-related intestinal perforation was missed, and he was discharged after anti-infection treatment until a clinical cure was met. After more than 2 months of normal peritoneal dialysis after returning home, the patient again had poor drainage of the peritoneal dialysis catheter, accompanied by the outflow of yellowish-brown sediment. It was found that the peritoneal dialysis catheter had evidence of intestinal perforation. After the removal of the catheter and intestinal repair, he recovered and was discharged from the hospital and received long-term hemodialysis treatment. In the case of delayed intestinal perforation, peritoneal dialysis was maintained normally for more than 2 months, which was an unprecedented situation in previous case reports. In addition, we should be alert to the occurrence of this rare complication, especially when we find the occurrence of polybacterial Peritonitis. Abdominal CT examination and imaging results judgment based on clinical conditions are particularly important for diagnosis.

Abdominal Wall Hernias in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients on Peritoneal Dialysis

Objective

To describe our experience with hernioplasty in peritoneal dialysis patients and to identify possible risk factors for surgical complications.

Design

A 4-year retrospective chart review of data.

Setting

Peritoneal dialysis unit of a university hospital.

Patients and Methods

58 hernias in 50 patients were included. Detailed surgical technique and complications were recorded. Possible risk factors included age, gender, weight, height, body mass index, previous surgery, diabetes, time on dialysis, emergency surgery, hospital stay, type of hernia, mesh use, blood hemoglobin, and serum urea, creatinine, and potassium.

Results

Complications occurred in 12 hernioplasties (4 wound infections, 2 peritonitis, 4 catheter dysfunction, and 5 re-operations). Recurrence rate was 12% without mesh use and 0% with mesh hernioplasty. Dialysis was re-instituted in 96% of cases within 3 days postoperatively. Identified risk factors for complications were diabetes, low weight, low height, small body mass index, and low serum creatinine.

Conclusions

Mesh hernioplasty in peritoneal dialysis patients is advisable. Postoperative dialysis with low volume is feasible after surgery. Prospective studies will corroborate our risk factors for morbidity.