Clinical practice guideline for the prevention and management of peritoneal dialysis associated infections in children: 2024 update

Infection-related complications remain the most significant cause for morbidity and technique failure in infants, children and adolescents who receive maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD). The 2024 update of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the Prevention and Management of Peritoneal Dialysis Associated Infection in Children builds upon previous such guidelines published in 2000 and 2012 and provides comprehensive treatment guidance as recommended by an international group of pediatric PD experts based upon a review of published literature and pediatric PD registry data. The workgroup prioritized updating key clinical issues contained in the 2012 guidelines, in addition to addressing additional questions developed using the PICO format. A variety of new guideline statements, highlighted by those pertaining to antibiotic therapy of peritonitis as a result of the evolution of antibiotic susceptibilities, antibiotic stewardship and clinical registry data, as well as new clinical benchmarks, are included. Recommendations for future research designed to fill important knowledge gaps are also provided.

Interventional nephrology in peritoneal dialysis: Best practice report of the Peritoneal Dialysis Project Group of the Italian Society of Nephrology

The procedure of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter placement is of utmost importance for a good outcome of peritoneal dialysis. Currently, catheters are mainly placed by surgeons and interventional nephrologists. Still, there is a lack of trained personnel in many dialysis units, which can impair the efficiency of PD units and reduce the patients' possibility to enter a PD programme. The Italian Society of Nephrology has endorsed a practical core curriculum for interventional nephrology in PD available on the Society website, which is here reported for the wider nephrology community. The topics addressed are the hernias of the abdominal wall, catheter placement with standard surgical open technique, basic video-laparoscopy, advanced video-laparoscopy, video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy and catheter placement, cuff-shaving and video-laparoscopy in catheter malfunction.

Inpatient peritoneal dialysis catheters placed across the United States during a 3-year period: Lessons learned from 15,000 patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis is a popular option for patients with end-stage renal disease. A recent presidential executive order has incentivized in-home end-stage renal disease treatments, leading to an increase in peritoneal dialysis use. Guidelines exist for creating and maintaining peritoneal dialysis access without addressing the optimal technique. This study evaluates nationwide peritoneal dialysis catheter placement practices and their long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis of Nationwide Readmission Database from 2017 to 2019. Patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing inpatient peritoneal dialysis catheter placement were included. Six-month readmissions, mortality, and peritoneal dialysis catheter-specific outcome measures were assessed among survivors of admission, including catheter leakage, mechanical breakdown, displacement, revision or replacement, removal, exit site infections, intra-abdominal abscess, and sepsis. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In the study, 14,863 patients with inpatient peritoneal dialysis catheter insertions were identified, of which 7,096 were analyzed (4,150 [59%] laparoscopic, 1,781 [25%] fluoroscopic, 1,165 [16%] open), 847 (12%) had major complications, 931 (13%) were readmitted, and 102 (1.4%) died within 6 months. Univariate analyses demonstrated that laparoscopy had higher mechanical complications, exit-site infections, catheter revision, and removal within 6 months, and fluoroscopy had higher sepsis and mortality. Multivariate analyses showed fluoroscopy was associated with intraabdominal abscess (adjusted odds ratio, 2.36; P = .025), laparoscopy with exit-site infections (adjusted odds ratio, 0.49; P = .005), and open surgery with catheter displacement (adjust odds ratio, 2.95; P = .021).

CONCLUSION

This is the first large-scale study on inpatient peritoneal dialysis catheter placement outcomes in the United States. Fluoroscopic and open surgical placements are routinely performed, but laparoscopy remains the mainstay with fewer exit-site infections. Overall, peritoneal dialysis is a safe option, with 1 in 9 patients having an infectious or mechanical complication within 6 months. Furthermore, large-scale prospective studies are warranted to identify the optimal placement technique.

Assessment of potential peritonitis risk factors in pediatric patients receiving maintenance peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Many recommendations regarding peritonitis prevention in international consensus guidelines are opinion-based rather than evidence-based. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion technique, timing of gastrostomy placement, and use of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary procedures on the risk of peritonitis in pediatric patients on PD.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients on maintenance PD using data from the SCOPE collaborative from 2011 to 2022. Data pertaining to laparoscopic PD catheter insertion (vs. open), gastrostomy placement after PD catheter insertion (vs. before/concurrent), and no prophylactic antibiotics (vs. yes) were obtained. Multivariable generalized linear mixed modeling was used to assess the relationship between each exposure and occurrence of peritonitis.

RESULTS

There was no significant association between PD catheter insertion technique and development of peritonitis (aOR = 2.50, 95% CI 0.64-9.80, p = 0.19). Patients who had a gastrostomy placed after PD catheter insertion had higher rates of peritonitis, but the difference was not statistically significant (aOR = 3.19, 95% CI 0.90-11.28, p = 0.07). Most patients received prophylactic antibiotics prior to procedures, but there was no significant association between prophylactic antibiotic use and peritonitis (aOR = 1.74, 95% CI 0.23-13.11, p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

PD catheter insertion technique does not appear to have a significant impact on peritonitis risk. Timing of gastrostomy placement may have some impact on peritonitis risk. Further study must be done to clarify the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on peritonitis risk. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Catheter insertion techniques for improving catheter function and clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) relies on the optimal functionality of the flexible plastic PD catheter present within the peritoneal cavity to enable effective treatment. As a result of limited evidence, it is uncertain if the PD catheter's insertion method influences the rate of catheter dysfunction and, thus, the quality of dialysis therapy. Numerous variations of four basic techniques have been adopted in an attempt to improve and maintain PD catheter function. This review evaluates the association between PD catheter insertion technique and associated differences in  PD catheter function and post-PD catheter insertion complications OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to 1) evaluate if a specific technique used for PD catheter insertion has lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction (early and late) and technique failure; and 2) examine if any of the available techniques results in a reduction in post-procedure complication rates including postoperative haemorrhage, exit-site infection and peritonitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 24 November 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining adults and children undergoing PD catheter insertion. The studies examined any two PD catheter insertion techniques, including laparoscopic, open-surgical, percutaneous and peritoneoscopic insertion. Primary outcomes of interest were PD catheter function and technique survival.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias for all included studies. Main outcomes in the Summary of Findings tables include primary outcomes - early PD catheter function, long-term PD catheter function, technique failure and postoperative complications. A random effects model was used to perform meta-analyses; risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) were calculated for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.  MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this review. Nine studies were suitable for inclusion in quantitative meta-analysis (670 randomised participants). Five studies compared laparoscopic with open PD catheter insertion, and four studies compared a 'medical' insertion technique with open surgical PD catheter insertion: percutaneous (2) and peritoneoscopic (2). Random sequence generation was judged to be at low risk of bias in eight studies. Allocation concealment was reported poorly, with only five studies judged to be at low risk of selection bias. Performance bias was judged to be high risk in 10 studies. Attrition bias and reporting bias were judged to be low in 14 and 12 studies, respectively. Six studies compared laparoscopic PD catheter insertion with open surgical insertion. Five studies could be meta-analysed (394 participants). For our primary outcomes, data were either not reported in a format that could be meta-analysed (early PD catheter function, long-term catheter function) or not reported at all (technique failure). One death was reported in the laparoscopic group and none in the open surgical group. In low certainty evidence, laparoscopic PD catheter insertion may make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (4 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.48; I² = 7%), PD catheter removal (4 studies, 257 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.64; I² = 0%), and dialysate leakage (4 studies, 330 participants: RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.49 to 4.02; I² = 0%), but may reduce the risk of haemorrhage (2 studies, 167 participants: RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.28 to 10.31; I² = 33%) and catheter tip migration (4 studies, 333 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.92; I² = 12%). Four studies compared a medical insertion technique with open surgical insertion (276 participants). Technique failure was not reported, and no deaths were reported (2 studies, 64 participants). In low certainty evidence, medical insertion may make little or no difference to early PD catheter function (3 studies, 212 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.83; I² = 0%), while one study reported long-term PD function may improve with peritoneoscopic insertion (116 participants: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.92). Peritoneoscopic catheter insertion may reduce the episodes of early peritonitis (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.71; I² = 0%) and dialysate leakage (2 studies, 177 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.71; I² = 0%). Medical insertion had uncertain effects on catheter tip migration (2 studies, 90 participants: RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.73; I² = 0%). Most of the studies examined were small and of poor quality, increasing the risk of imprecision. There was also a significant risk of bias therefore cautious interpretation of results is advised.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available studies show that the evidence needed to guide clinicians in developing their PD catheter insertion service is lacking. No PD catheter insertion technique had lower rates of PD catheter dysfunction. High-quality, evidence-based data are urgently required, utilising multi-centre RCTs or large cohort studies, in order to provide definitive guidance relating to PD catheter insertion modality.

A Nationwide Comparative Analysis of Peritoneoscopic and Laparoscopic Techniques for Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion in Brunei Darussalam

Key Points

Peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter insertions are complementary to each other, and each has its niche in a successful peritoneal dialysis program. Future studies need to use standardized definitions to enable comparisons across jurisdictions, and this study is the first to do so.

Background

Brunei Darussalam introduced peritoneoscopic insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) as a new method in 2014. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of PDC insertion technique in the country, using proposed standardized definitions of outcomes.

Methods

This study used retrospective analysis of all PDCs inserted from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, in the country. Outcomes of both peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic insertion methods were analyzed. Four main categories of outcomes were assessed—(1 ) operative-related outcomes, (2 ) infective outcomes, (3 ) mechanical outcomes, and (4 ) time on peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy.

Results

During the study period, 145 PDCs were inserted: 49 (33.8%) were by peritoneoscopy and 96 (66.2%) by laparoscopy. The median time on PD therapy was 54.2 months. Those with a higher body mass index and history of previous abdominal or pelvic surgery were more likely to undergo laparoscopic method. There was no significant difference in overall infective and mechanical outcomes between the two methods. There was however significantly more postoperative pain observed in the peritoneoscopic group than in the laparoscopic group (8.2% versus 1.0%, P = 0.045). During the study period, there were 49 dropouts to hemodialysis, about half were due to infection. However, there was no statistically significant difference observed in time on PD therapy between the two groups (hazard ratio 0.87 in laparoscopic group compared with peritoneoscopic group, 95% confidence interval, 0.49 to 1.54; P =0.636).

Conclusions

Peritoneoscopic and laparoscopic PD catheter insertions are both complementary to each other in our local setting. This study has enabled us to scrutinize our PD program, regarding our PDC insertion experience, with the aim to sustain PD growth in the country.

Does laparoscopic omentectomy reduce CAPD catheter malfunction: A three-arm pilot randomized trial

Introduction:

Catheter malfunction secondary to omental wrapping is a frequent complication of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). Of the various methods of peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion (PDCI), open surgical insertion under local anesthesia is most widely practiced. Laparoscopic omentectomy is often undertaken as a salvage procedure in case of malfunctioning catheters. However, there is no randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the role of prophylactic laparoscopic omentectomy on catheter function. This pilot RCT was undertaken to evaluate the impact of laparoscopic omentectomy on the incidence of catheter malfunction.

Materials and Methods:

Consecutive patients were randomized into three groups: laparoscopic PDCI with omentectomy (Group A), laparoscopic PDCI without omentectomy (Group B) and open surgical PDCI (Group C). The primary outcome was the incidence of catheter malfunction at 6 weeks and 3 months.

Results:

Forty-one patients completed follow-up, with 16, 11, and 14 patients in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Incidence of catheter malfunction was 6.2%, 27.3%, and 14.3% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively, at 6 weeks and 6.2%, 36.4%, and 21.4% at 3 months, respectively. In patients with previously failed catheter insertion (n = 23), malfunction at 3 months was 8.3% (1/12) in patients who had omentectomy, compared with 45.5% (5/11) in those who did not (P = 0.069). Operating time was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in Group A.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic omentectomy may be associated with a lower incidence of catheter malfunction, especially in patients with previously failed peritoneal dialysis catheter. Data from this pilot RCT can be used to design a large trial with an adequate number of patients.

Risk Factors and Management of Catheter Malfunction During Urgent-Start Peritoneal Dialysis

Background: Catheter malfunction is a common complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the risk factors and management of catheter malfunction in urgent-start PD.

Methods: Patients who underwent urgent-start PD were divided into catheter-malfunction and control groups. Baseline demographic and laboratory data of the two groups were compared, and the risk factors for catheter malfunction were analyzed. Primary outcome measure was catheter survival, and the secondary outcomes were surgical complications and malfunction treatment.

Results: Total of 700 patients was analyzed, among whom 143 (20.4%) experienced catheter malfunctions, specifically catheter migration (96, 67.1%), omental wrapping (36, 25.2%), and migration plus omental wrapping (11, 7.7%). Catheter survival time in the malfunction group (202.5 ± 479.4 days) was significantly shorter than that in the control group (1295.3 ± 637.0 days) (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed higher body mass index [hazard ratio (HR), 1.061; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.010–1.115; P = 0.018], lower surgeon count (HR, 1.083; 95% CI, 1.032–1.136; P = 0.001), and higher serum potassium (HR, 1.231; 95% CI, 1.041–1.494; P = 0.036) as independent risk factors for catheter malfunction, while older age (HR, 0.976, 95% CI, 0.962–0.991; P = 0.002) and colonic dialysis (HR, 0.384; 95% CI, 0.254–0.581; P < 0.001) as protective factors. Further subgroup analysis revealed a shorter catheter survival time in patients with younger age ( ≤ 40 years), higher serum potassium levels (≥5 mmol/L), while a longer catheter survival time in patients with colonic dialysis. PD tube and subcutaneous tunnel preservation was successful in 41 out of 44 patients with omental wrapping. All patients had good post-incision prognoses.

Conclusions: Urgent-start PD is safe and effective for unplanned PD patients. Adequate pre-operative colonic dialysis and serum potassium level control are conducive in preventing catheter malfunction. Conservative treatment is effective in managing catheter migration alone, while preservation of the PD tube and the subcutaneous tunnel is effective for omental wrapping.

Technique d’implantation chirurgicale des cathéters de dialyse péritonéale. Expérience d’un centre

Alors que la réalisation d'un abord vasculaire est un acte fréquent pour un chirurgien qui travaille avec un centre d'hémodialyse, l'implantation d'un cathéter de dialyse péritonéale s'avère souvent plus rare en raison d'un nombre inférieur de patients pris en charge en dialyse péritonéale (DP).  Certains centres vont parfois avoir moins de dix nouveaux patients par an traités par DP ; lorsque un chirurgien débute cette activité, il est important que sa technique d'implantation du cathéter de DP soit d'emblée maitrisée pour permette au néphrologue de prendre en charge son patient dans les meilleures conditions avec un cathéter de DP fonctionnel quelle que soit la modalité de DP.  L'implantation en ambulatoire, sous anesthésie locale ou générale, permet de limiter la durée d'hospitalisation. L'utilisation de cathéters en col de cygne à extrémité droite, un trajet pre péritonéale tangentiel, la vérification fonctionnelle per opératoire terminée par une introduction de 100 ml de dialysat, une première réfection du pansement et une première utilisation au dixième jour permettent dans notre expérience d'avoir un cathéter fonctionnel dans 93,5 % des cas.

Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines 2019 Part 2: Main Text (Position paper of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy)

Background

This article is a duplicated publication from the Japanese version of “2019 JSDT Guidelines for Peritoneal Dialysis” with permission from the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT). This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed primarily by the Working Group on Revision of Peritoneal Dialysis (PD) Guidelines of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy. Recently, the definition and creation process for CPGs have become far more rigorous; traditional methods and formats no longer adhere to current standards. To improve the reliability of international transmission of our findings, CPGs are created in compliance with the methodologies developed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. Part 2 of this PD guideline is the first CPG developed by our society that conforms to the GRADE approach.

Methods

Detailed processes were created in accordance with the Cochrane handbook and the GRADE approach developed by the GRADE working group.

Results

Clinical question (CQ)1: Is the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RAS inhibitors), such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), effective in PD patients?

Recommendation: We suggest the usage of RAS inhibitors (ACEI and ARB) in PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ2: Icodextrin or glucose solution: which is more useful as a dialysate among patients with PD?

Recommendation: We suggest using icodextrin when managing body fluids in PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ3: Is it better to apply or not apply mupirocin/gentamicin ointment to the exit site?

Recommendation: We suggest not applying mupirocin/gentamicin ointment to the exit sites of PD patients (GRADE 2C).

CQ4: Which surgical approach is more desirable when a PD catheter is placed, open surgery or laparoscopic surgery?

No recommendation.

CQ5: Which administration route of antibiotics is better in PD patients with peritonitis, intravenous or intraperitoneal?

Recommendation: We suggest intraperitoneal administration of antibiotics in PD patients with peritonitis (GRADE 2C).

Note: The National Insurance does not currently cover intraperitoneal administration.

CQ6: Is peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis better as the first renal replacement therapy in diabetic patients?

No recommendation.

Conclusions

In the future, we suggest that society members construct their own evidence to answer CQs not brought up in this guideline, and thereby show the achievements of Japan worldwide.

Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines 2019 Part 1 (Position paper of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy)

Approximately 10 years have passed since the Peritoneal Dialysis Guidelines were formulated in 2009. Much evidence has been reported during the succeeding years, which were not taken into consideration in the previous guidelines, e.g., the next peritoneal dialysis PD trial of encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) in Japan, the significance of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), the effects of icodextrin solution, new developments in peritoneal pathology, and a new international recommendation on a proposal for exit-site management. It is essential to incorporate these new developments into the new clinical practice guidelines. Meanwhile, the process of creating such guidelines has changed dramatically worldwide and differs from the process of creating what were “clinical practice guides.” For this revision, we not only conducted systematic reviews using global standard methods but also decided to adopt a two-part structure to create a reference tool, which could be used widely by the society’s members attending a variety of patients. Through a working group consensus, it was decided that Part 1 would present conventional descriptions and Part 2 would pose clinical questions (CQs) in a systematic review format. Thus, Part 1 vastly covers PD that would satisfy the requirements of the members of the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT). This article is the duplicated publication from the Japanese version of the guidelines and has been reproduced with permission from the JSDT.

Peritoneal dialysis access outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Functional peritoneal dialysis (PD) access is critical to the success of PD therapy. The aim of this review is to describe the spectrum of definitions and methods employed in the measurement of unique outcomes across PD access trials particularly focusing on the outcomes of PD access flow restriction and operative-related outcomes.

METHODS

Using Cochrane CENTRAL registry, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, we searched for studies restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving interventions related to PD access without restrictions on age, language, or publication year. Studies were screened and data abstracted by two independent reviewers. Definitions, outcome measures, and time points of measurements were captured and documented separately. Unique combinations of these variables resulted in reporting the different ways of measurements.

RESULTS

Of the 1768 screened studies, 47 RCTs were included among which 817 PD access outcomes were grouped into 7 broad categories. Interventions evaluated in the RCTs were catheter type/configuration (n = 17), insertion technique (n = 15), multiple interventions (n = 3), and other (6 interventions, n = 12). PD access flow restriction (a subcategory of mechanical outcomes) and operative-related outcomes were reported in 91% and 58% of the included trials, respectively. Tip migration was the most frequently reported flow restriction outcome (59% of RCTs) followed by catheter dysfunction (23% of RCTs). Of the components utilized in definition of flow restriction, description of the impaired flow was reported in 37% of RCTs, need for intervention in 42% of RCTs, and presumed etiology of flow restriction in 60% of RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Variability exists in the definitions, reporting methods, choice of outcomes, and analysis of the PD access outcomes across RCTs. Operative-related outcomes remain underreported across RCTs. Outcomes relating to PD access flow restriction were the most common complications reported in the included RCTs but were reported heterogeneously with variability in reporting of the three key components of its definition including description and severity of the flow restriction, the need for intervention and etiology of flow restriction. In the future, defining PD access flow restriction should include all of these components to better evaluate the comparative effect of various PD access interventions.

Different techniques for peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

The current consensus recommended the peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) techniques based on the patients' anesthesia situation and previous abdominal surgery. However, the research comparing of all the existing PDC techniques is lacking. The objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of PDC techniques by network meta-analysis (NMA). A systematic review of databases was conducted to identify eligible studies. NMA was used to estimate the ranking for endpoints. Our NMA included 41 studies (9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 32 observational trials) and enrolled 3902 patients, comparing three techniques: the laparoscopic catheterization (LC), open surgery catheterization (OSC), and percutaneous catheterization (PC). NMA in RCTs showed OSC had the highest incidence of catheter mechanical dysfunction, PC and LC were very similar, but this result had no statistical difference. NMA in observational studies showed that LC had the highest 1-year catheter survival but without statistical difference (LC vs. OSC: odds ratio (OR) 1.75, 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 0.90-3.40; PC vs. OSC: OR 1.55, 95% CrIs 0.80-2.97; PC vs. LC: OR 0.88, 95% CrIs 0.54-1.44). OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. The complications of leakage, peritonitis, and exit/tunnel infection were inconclusive due to the inconsistent results between RCTs and observational studies. Our NMA revealed LC may have the best 1-year catheter survival. PC and LC might be efficacious in lowering the mechanical dysfunction. OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. More RCTs with larger scale and higher quality are needed in order to obtain more credible evidence.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement, an Improvement on the Single Trocar Technique

In 2002, Ochsner laparoscopic surgeons and nephrologists began placing peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters via a laparoscopic-assisted method. We compared laparoscopically placed PD catheters (LAPD) with catheters most recently placed without laparoscopic aid (STPD). The method for this study is a retrospective chart review. Demographics of both groups were similar. Nine of 20 (45%) in the STPD group and 16 of 23 (70%) in the LAPD group had had previous abdominal surgery. Three of 20 (15%) of STPD had complications, including one small bowel injury. Four of 23 (17.4%) of the LAPD had complications. One of 20 (5%) in the STPD group and 3 of 23 (13%) in the LAPD group had dialysate leaks. In the STPD group, 8 of 20 (40%) had catheter problems that led to removal in 7 (35%). In the LAPD group, 6 of 23 (26%) had catheter malfunction: 3 were salvaged with a laparoscopic procedure; 3 (13%) were removed for malfunction. 1) LAPD allows proper PD placement after complex abdominal surgery; 2) Although dialysate leak complications are increased, bowel perforation risk is less; 3) Because of proper placement, PD catheter malfunction rate is less with LAPD; 4) Although no results obtained statistical significance, we found LAPD superior to STPD and have converted to this technique.

Going Home: Access for Home Modalities

The cost and health burden of ESRD continues to increase globally. Total Medicare expenditure on dialysis has increased from 229 million USD in 1973 to 35.4 billion USD in 2016. Dialysis access can represent almost a tenth of these costs. Central venous catheters have been recognized as a significant factor driving costs and mortality in this population. Home dialysis, which includes peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, is an effective way of reducing costs related to renal replacement therapy, reducing central venous catheter usage and in many cases improving the clinical and psychosocial aspects of patients' health. Addressing access-related issues for peritoneal dialysis, urgent-start peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis can have impact on the success of home dialysis. This article reviews issues related to dialysis access for home therapies.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion using multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar: A modified percutaneous PD catheter placement technique

Background

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound‐guided percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion using multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar.

Methods

A retrospective review of 103 ESRD patients receiving percutaneous PD catheter insertion using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar under ultrasound guidance at a single center between May 2016 and May 2018. Mechanical complications and catheter survival were evaluated over a 12‐month follow‐up.

Result

Catheterization using this technique required only 10‐30 minutes from the beginning of local anesthesia to the end of skin suture at the puncture site (mean 18 ± 7 minutes) and an incision length of 2‐4 cm. Moreover, only four of 103 cases required catheter removal due to poor drainage within one month after surgery, with a success rate of 96.19%. Among failures, omentum wrapping was cause in two cases, catheter displacement in one case, and protein clot blockage in one case, while there were no instances of organ injury, severe hemorrhage, peritubular leakage, hernia, peritonitis, or exit infection within one month of PD catheter insertion. Catheter survival at 1 year was 92.2%.

Conclusion

Percutaneous PD catheter insertion using a multifunctional bladder paracentesis trocar and ultrasound guidance is a feasible technique for ESRD patients.

Laparoscopic Placement of Oreopoulos–Zellerman Catheters in CAPD Patients

Background

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is widely accepted for the management of end-stage renal disease. Various techniques have been described for the insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Lately, with the evolution of laparoscopic surgery, different laparoscopic techniques have also been presented, suggesting the technique is preferable to the open and percutaneous methods.

Objective

To introduce and evaluate a new laparoscopic technique for insertion of Oreopoulos–Zellerman catheters in CAPD patients.

Setting

The study was carried out in the First Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Athens University Medical School, Hippokration Hospital.

Patients and Methods

Between November 2000 and March 2002, the technique was applied in 20 consecutive patients (mean age 62 years, range 54 – 70 years) with end-stage renal disease. During this technique, a 10-mm trocar is placed just below the umbilicus for the optics and a 5-mm trocar is placed in the right lower quadrant. With the help of a 10-mm trocar, a tunnel is formed in the standard paramedian position on the left side, 2 – 3 cm below the plane of the umbilicus, for the insertion of the peritoneal catheter. A laparoscopic needle (GraNee needle; R-Med, Oregon, Ohio, USA) is used for the closure of the 10-mm trocar-induced peritoneal and fascia defect using a purse-string suture. The catheter is advanced into the abdomen under direct vision and guided toward the Douglas pouch. The subcutaneous tunnel and the patency test of the catheter are performed as the last main steps in our procedure. One surgeon undertook all procedures.

Results

All procedures were completed laparoscopically. The mean operative time was 30 minutes (range 25 – 40 minutes). There was no intraoperative complication or surgical mortality. One patient developed leakage at the catheter exit site 3 days after surgery; it was corrected under local anesthesia. During a mean follow-up time of 17 months (range 12 – 28 months), 1 patient required catheter removal due to fungal peritonitis.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic insertion of the Oreopoulos–Zellerman catheter is a simple, quick, and safe method. We believe future experience will encourage the laparoscopic technique as the method of choice.

Randomized controlled trials for comparison of laparoscopic versus conventional open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis

Background

The application of laparoscopic catheterization technology in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients has recently increased. However, the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic versus conventional open PD catheter placement are still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the complications of catheterization in PD patients and to provide a reference for choosing a PD-catheter placement technique in the clinic.

Methods

We searched numerous databases, including Embase, PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane Library, for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Results

Eight relevant studies (n = 646) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed a lower incidence of catheter migration (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.90, P: 0.03) and catheter removal (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.79, P: 0.008) but a higher incidence of bleeding (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.18 to 8.97, P: 0.02) with a laparoscopic approach than with a conventional approach. There was no significant difference in the incidence of omentum adhesion (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.05 to 2.10, P: 0.24), hernia (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.09 to 1.68, P: 0.20), leakage (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.26, P: 0.23), intestinal obstruction (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.91, P: 0.90) or perforation (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.06 to 15.42, P: 0.97). The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in early (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.33, P: 0.15), late (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.90, P: 0.76) or total (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.12, P: 0.13) peritonitis infections between the 2 groups, and there are no no significant difference in early (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.06 to 2.36, P: 0.30), late (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.33, P: 0.16) or total (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.02, P: 0.17) tunnel or exit-site infections between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic catheterization and conventional open catheter placement in PD patients have unique advantages, but laparoscopic PD catheterization may be superior to conventional open catheter placement. However, this conclusion needs to be confirmed with further large-sample-size, multi-centre, high-quality RCTs.

A Laparoscopic Approach under Local Anesthesia for Peritoneal Dialysis Access

Objective

Presented herein is a technical description of a time-proven laparoscopic approach to establishing successful long-term peritoneal dialysis access.

Design

Using a two-port technique, the peritoneal catheter is inserted through a paramedian port site while continuously monitoring the implant procedure with a laparoscope from a second port location. A long rectus sheath tunnel created with a nontrocar port device keeps the dialysis catheter oriented toward the pelvis. Helium abdominal insufflation enables full surgical laparoscopy under local anesthesia. Validation of the effectiveness of the technique is made by comparison to previous implantation experience using an open dissection method.

Patients

Laparoscopic implantation of peritoneal catheters was performed in 150 patients, and placement by open dissection was accomplished in 63 patients.

Main Outcome Measure

The incidence of complications and revision-free catheter survival between implantation methods were compared.

Results

Catheters implanted laparoscopically had a significantly lower incidence of flow dysfunction ( p < 0.05) and better survival ( p < 0.001) than those placed by open dissection.

Conclusions

Compared to implantation by open dissection, the laparoscopic approach provides the patient reduced perioperative discomfort. The procedure can be performed safely with the patient under local anesthesia on an ambulatory basis. Laparoscopic implantation significantly reduces the incidence of catheter flow dysfunction and permits simultaneous identification and correction of other problems that could complicate dialysis therapy.

Lower Malfunction Rate with Self-Locating Catheters

Objective

We analyzed malfunction rates (obstruction, omental wrapping, displacement) and catheter survival for self-locating catheters as compared with other Tenckhoff catheter designs.

Patients and Methods

We conducted our survey at two centers, prospectively studying all self-locating catheters implanted from May 1997 to October 2000 and used for peritoneal dialysis (PD). Tenckhoff catheters of other designs used previously in our units were used as the control group. We analyzed removal causes and catheter survival.

Results

We studied 173 catheters (105 self-locating catheters, 53 straight catheters, and 15 coiled catheters) implanted in 139 patients (43% of them women) with a mean age of 53 ± 14 years. The analysis of catheter removal showed that 3 of 105 self-locating catheters, 3 of 15 coiled catheters, and 17 of 53 straight catheters were removed owing to malfunction (c 2: p = 0.0000). Kaplan–Meier curves showed that the bulk of removals for malfunction occurred within the first 3 months after PD start. The group of self-locating catheters showed better survival (log-rank: p = 0.0009). Other causes for catheter removal included peritonitis ( n = 22), exit-site infection alone ( n = 4), and end of PD treatment ( n = 66). No significant differences were seen in the annual peritonitis rate (straight-tip: 0.955 ± 2.315 episodes annually; coiled-tip: 0.651 ± 0.864 episodes annually; self-locating: 0.720 ± 1.417 episodes annually; t-test: p > 0.400). No gut or bladder perforations were observed.

Conclusion

In our survey, self-locating catheters were associated with better survival and fewer removals for malfunction than were Tenckhoff catheters of other designs.

Malfunctioning Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter and Accompanying Surgical Pathology Repaired by Laparoscopic Surgery

♦ Objectives

To review the laparoscopic salvaging of malfunctioning peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters, and to present our experience with laparoscopic repair of dysfunctional Tenckhoff catheters and the treatment of accompanying surgical pathologies.

♦ Design

Malfunctioning peritoneal catheters were repaired using laparoscopic rescue techniques. Accompanying surgical problems were treated in the same operation. The effectiveness of these approaches was validated by comparison with other remedial techniques described previously.

♦ Patients

Malfunctioning PD catheters were salvaged by laparoscopic surgery in 8 patients, and accompanying surgical problems were treated in the same operation in 3 of the 8 patients.

♦ Main Outcome Measures

Outcome was measured by the successful return to adequate PD and effective treatment of surgical problems.

♦ Results

Eight patient studies show laparoscopic correction of malfunctioning catheters and the treatment of accompanying surgical pathologies with the return to successful PD.

♦ Conclusion

The salvaging of malfunctioning PD catheters by laparoscopic surgery is an ideal method. This procedure permits simultaneous identification and correction of other surgical problems that could otherwise complicate dialysis therapy.

Minilaparoscopic Extraperitoneal Tunneling with Omentopexy: A New Technique for CAPD Catheter Placement

Background

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is an effective form of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Open insertion of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters is the standard surgical technique, but it is associated with a relatively high incidence of catheter-related problems. To overcome these problems, different laparoscopic techniques have been presented, being preferable to the open and percutaneous methods.

Objective

To introduce and evaluate the efficiency of laparoscopic omental fixation and extraperitoneal placement of the cuff–coil part (the straight portion) of the catheter to prevent catheter tip migration, pericatheter leakage, severe abdominal pain, and the obstruction caused by omental wrapping.

Setting

The study was carried out in the General Surgery Department, Akdeniz University Medical School, in Turkey.

Patients and Methods

Between November 2001 and March 2005, the technique was applied in 44 consecutive patients (mean age 51.6 years, range 18 – 67 years) with end-stage renal disease. During this laparoscopic technique, the omentum was first fixed onto the parietal peritoneum, and then the catheter was introduced through the subumbilical trocar site into the posterior rectus compartment and advanced toward the symphysis pubis. The catheter was then inserted into the abdominal cavity, passing the peritoneal opening, which was prepared before catheter insertion. The straight portion of the catheter was located into the extraperitoneal area of the anterior abdominal wall. The curled end, which contains the side-holes of the catheter, was placed into the true pelvis. Catheter position and patency were verified under direct vision using a 2 mm telescope.

Results

All procedures were completed laparoscopically. Operating time ranged between 40 and 100 minutes (median 52 minutes). There was no intraoperative complication or surgical mortality. Peritoneal dialysis was initiated within 15 – 24 hours after catheter implantation. After a median follow-up period of 17.4 months (range 1 – 38 months), early exit-site infection occurred in 1 of 44 patients. All catheters functioned well postoperatively. There was no pain during CAPD.

Conclusion

This new laparoscopic technique using an extraperitoneal approach with omentopexy for PD catheter placement could prove extremely useful for preventing catheter malfunction caused by catheter tip migration, pericatheter leakage, omental wrapping, and periodic catheter movement that causes abdominal pain in CAPD.

Peritoneal Catheters and Exit-Site Practices toward Optimum Peritoneal Access: A Review of Current Developments

Objective

This review updates the 1998 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) recommendations for peritoneal dialysis catheters and exit-site practices (Gokal R, et al. Peritoneal catheters and exit-site practices toward optimum peritoneal access: 1998 update. Perit Dial Int 1998; 18:11–33.)

Design

Data Sources: The Ovid and PubMed search engines were used to review the Medline databases of January 1980 through June 2003. Searches were restricted to human data; primary key word searches included dialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis cross referenced with access, catheter, dialysis catheter, peritoneal dialysis catheter, and Tenckhoff catheter. Related searches were provided via the PubMed related articles link. Study Selection: Reports were selected if they provided identifiable information on catheter design, catheter placement technique, and survival or placement complications. Reports without such data were excluded from review. Each study was then categorized by its characteristics: single-center or multicenter; retrospective or prospective; controlled trial, with or without random patient assignment; or review article.

Main Results

There are few randomized controlled evaluations testing how catheter design and/or placement influence long-term survival and function, and these are typically conducted at a single center. The majority of reports represent retrospective single-center experiences, and these are supplemented by occasional multicenter data registries.

Conclusions

There is substantial variability in catheter outcomes between centers, and this variability is more closely correlated with operator and center characteristics than with catheter design. Some catheter designs appear to impact long-term catheter success, and, in some cases, specific patient characteristics and dialysis formats combine with specific catheter designs to influence catheter survival. Most reporters prefer two-cuff designs and placement of the deep cuff at an intramuscular location. Intramuscular cuff placement results in fewer pericatheter leaks and hernias, but makes catheter removal more difficult. High-risk patients (those with previous pelvic surgery) benefit from visual inspection of the peritoneum during catheter placement, and in randomized controlled trials, catheters with pre-shaped arcuate subcutaneous segments (“swan neck” designs) reduce the risk of early drainage failure via “migration.”

Bleeding Complications Associated with Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion

Objective

To identify the incidence of bleeding complications associated with peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion.

Design

Retrospective review at a tertiary-care center of all double-cuffed Tenckhoff catheters placed surgically from 1 January 1992 to 1 October 2003 to identify the incidence of major bleeding complications occurring with catheter insertion. Major bleeding episodes were defined as ≥ 3% decline in hematocrit, or the need for surgical intervention or blood transfusion within 2 weeks of insertion.

Results

292 catheters had been inserted in 263 patients. Six patients satisfied the criteria for a major bleeding event, for a major bleeding complication rate of 2%. Bleeding was associated with perioperative anticoagulation in 3 patients, uremia and thrombocytopenia in 1 patient, aspirin use and thrombocytopenia in 1 patient, and 1 patient experienced intraoperative bleeding. Coagulation parameters were not obtained prior to the procedure in 2 of the 6 patients.

Conclusion

The rate of serious bleeding complications related to catheter insertion is low and usually associated with anticoagulation. Holding anticoagulation therapy for a minimum of 24 hours during the postoperative period should eliminate much of the risk. Coagulation parameters should also be obtained and corrected preoperatively.

Fluoroscopically Guided Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement: Long-Term Results from a Single Center

Objective

Despite percutaneous fluoroscopy ensuring appropriate placement of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters, the efficacy of this method is not well known. Therefore, we evaluated our long-term experience with fluoroscopy-assisted placement of PD catheters.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 134 PD catheters in 114 PD patients that were treated in the PD center of a university-based hospital. We evaluated complications related to PD catheters, causes for catheter removal, and catheter survival. We used the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model to identify independent factors related to PD catheter survival.

Results

Early complications related to insertion included 1 case of pericatheter bleeding; there were no placement failures. Early complications occurred in 8.5% of patients. Most late complications were migration and leakage, which occurred in 10.4% and 9.7% of patients respectively. The most common cause for catheter removal was intractable and recurrent peritonitis. The 12- and 24-month survival rates of the catheters were 80.0% and 74.9%. The most significant prognostic factor of percutaneous fluoroscopy-assisted PD catheter survival was late leakage ( p < 0.01).

Conclusions

In addition to the advantages of simplicity, minimal invasiveness, and relative safety, the survival rate of PD catheters placed using the percutaneous fluoroscopy-assisted method was comparable to that of more invasive methods. Percutaneous fluoroscopy-assisted placement of PD catheters should be considered when available, and may be preferred to other placement methods.

Comparison of the complications of open surgery versus laparoscopic technique in insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter

Background:

Invention of peritoneal dialysis (PD) has opened new windows for patients under dialysis due to its fewer time requirement and being ambulatory in comparison to hemodialysis. Open surgery and laparoscopic technique have been utilized for peritoneal catheter embedding; however, data about the superior technique are controversial. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of open surgery versus laparoscopic technique and compare their complications in those with survival of over and less than a year in patients who need PD for the first time.

Materials and Methods:

This randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 121 cases admitted for PD. Patients were randomly divided into two groups undergoing either open or laparoscopic surgery for embedding PD catheter. Patients’ demographics, as well as PD function and complications, were followed for a 12-month duration and compared between the two groups.

Results:

Catheter survival for over 12 months occurred in 39 patients (65%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 45 (73.8%) patients underwent open surgery (P = 0.09). Complications, including catheter obstruction, leak, abdominal hernia, and peritonitis, were not statistically different between the two techniques over 12 months of survival (P > 0.05). Complications among the catheters with less than a year survival, including obstruction, leak, catheter displacement, hernia, and peritonitis, were not significantly different comparing open surgery with laparoscopic technique (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Considering complications, PD catheter implantation through laparoscopic surgery was not statistically different from open surgery, neither for those with less than 12 months of survival nor for those with over a year.

Catheter type, placement and insertion techniques for preventing catheter-related infections in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritonitis is one of the limiting factors for the growth of peritoneal dialysis (PD) worldwide and is a major cause of technique failure. Several studies have examined the effectiveness of various catheter-related interventions for lowering the risk of PD-related peritonitis. This is an update of a review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of different catheter implantation techniques and catheter types in lowering the risk of PD-related peritonitis in PD patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 15 January 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies comparing different catheter insertion techniques, catheter types, use of immobilisation techniques and different break-in periods were included. Studies of different PD sets were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using a random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two studies (3144 participants) were included: 18 evaluated techniques of catheter implantation, 22 examined catheter types, one assessed an immobiliser device, and one examined break-in period. In general, study quality was variable and almost all aspects of study design did not fulfil CONSORT standards for reporting.Catheter insertion by laparoscopy compared with laparotomy probably makes little or no difference to the risks of peritonitis (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.35; moderate certainty evidence), exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.31; low certainty evidence), catheter removal/replacement (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; low certainty evidence), technique failure (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.08; low certainty evidence), and death (all causes) (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.20; moderate certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether subcutaneous burying of catheter increases peritonitis (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.60; very low certainty evidence). Midline insertion compared to lateral insertion probably makes little or no difference to the risks of peritonitis (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.33; moderate certainty evidence) and may make little or no difference to exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.58; low certainty evidence). Percutaneous insertion compared with open surgery probably makes little or no difference to the exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.30; moderate certainty evidence).Straight catheters probably make little or no difference to the risk of peritonitis (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.31; moderate certainty evidence), peritonitis rate (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.21; moderate certainty evidence), risk of exit-site infection (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.34; moderate certainty evidence), and exit-site infection rate (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.43; moderate certainty evidence) compared to coiled catheter. It is uncertain whether straight catheters prevent catheter removal or replacement (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.66; very low certainty evidence) but straight catheters probably make little or no difference to technique failure (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.31; moderate certainty evidence) and death (all causes) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.46; low certainty evidence) compared to coiled catheter. Tenckhoff catheter with artificial curve at subcutaneous tract compared with swan-neck catheter may make little or no difference to peritonitis (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.96; low certainty evidence) and incidence of exit-site/tunnel infection (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.21; low certainty evidence) but may slightly improve exit-site infection rate (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence that any catheter-related intervention, including the use of different catheter types or different insertion techniques, reduces the risks of PD peritonitis or other PD-related infections, technique failure or death (all causes). However, the numbers and sizes of studies were generally small and the methodological quality of available studies was suboptimal, such that the possibility that a particular catheter-related intervention might have a beneficial effect cannot be completely ruled out with confidence.

Outcomes of laparoscopic and open CAPD catheter placement: A single-center experience

Background

Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) catheter placement is typically a straightforward surgical procedure performed on chronically ill patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Post-operative outcomes and reoperative rates vary greatly in the medical literature. We report our experience using both minimally invasive and open techniques in placing CAPD catheters and offer our surgical outcomes.

Methods

This study is an IRB-approved, retrospective review (2005–2018) of all patients undergoing CAPD catheter placement at Mayo Clinic-Rochester. Analysis focused on specific patient outcomes, including early (< 30 days) versus late (≥ 30 days) complication and reoperation rates.

Results

A total of 173 patients with ESRD (mean ASA score = 3.1) underwent laparoscopic (n = 22) and open (n = 151) CAPD catheter placement (mean follow-up = 309 days; range: 1–3497 days). The total index operation complication rate was 41%. The total index reoperation rate was 37% and was similar in open and laparoscopic approaches. CAPD catheters malfunctioned in 19 patients (11% of total) and each underwent reoperation. CAPD catheter infections occurred in 30 patients (17% of total), and 24 required reoperation; 6 patients were treated successfully with antibiotics. CAPD catheter migrations occurred in 21 patients (12% of total) and all underwent reoperation.

Conclusion

Although CAPD catheter placements in patients with ESRD are technically easy to accomplish, the long term outcomes suggest as many as one in three patients will struggle with catheter function or infection. This study has led to changes in our technical CAPD catheter placement procedures, as well as the post-operative patient care algorithm.

•

Open CAPD catheter placement is faster than using a laparoscopic approach

•

One in 3 patients with CAPD catheters will struggle with tube dysfunction or infection

•

Laparoscopic CAPD catheter placement is technically easy to perform

Advanced Laparoscopic Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal methodology of establishing access for peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains controversial. Previously published randomized controlled trials and cohort studies do not demonstrate an advantage for 1 technique over another. Four published meta-analyses comparing outcomes of laparoscopic versus open PD catheter (PDC) insertion have given inconsistent conclusions and are flawed since they group basic and advanced laparoscopy together. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine whether advanced laparoscopic interventions consisting of rectus sheath tunneling and adjunctive procedures produce a better outcome than open insertion or basic laparoscopy used only to verify the catheter position.

METHODS

A literature search using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database was performed, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.5 software (Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Outcomes evaluated incidence of catheter obstruction, migration, pericannular leak, hernia, infectious complications (peritonitis and exit-site infection) and catheter survival.

RESULTS

Of the 467 records identified, 7 cohort studies, including 1,045 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. When advanced laparoscopy was compared with open insertion, a significant reduction was observed in the incidence of catheter obstruction (odds ratio [OR] 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03 - 0.63; p = 0.01), catheter migration (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.06 - 0.26; p = 0.00001), pericannular leak (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 - 0.64; p = 0.003), and pericannular and incisional hernias (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09 - 0.94; p = 0.04), as well as better 1- and 2-year catheter survival (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 - 0.97; p = 0.04 and OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 - 0.92; p = 0.03, respectively). Compared with basic laparoscopy, catheter obstruction and migration were significantly lower in the advanced laparoscopic group, whereas catheter survival was similar in both groups. All outcomes, except catheter obstruction, were similar between the basic laparoscopy and open insertion. The infectious complications such as peritonitis and exit-site infections were similar between the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced laparoscopy was associated with a significant superior outcome in comparison with open insertion and basic laparoscopy.

Wang's Forceps-Assisted Percutaneous Insertion and Fixation of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter

Percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters is theoretically most preferred by nephrologists because of the advantages of bedside performing, surgery independence, and minimal injury over other procedures of catheter placement such as open surgical dissection or laparoscopic operation. However, blindly placing catheters in the percutaneous procedure brings the risk of catheter malposition or bowel perforation; this largely retarded it's implementation. We had previously developed a novel technique termed "Wang's forceps-assisted catheter insertion and fixation," which had been successfully applied in the open surgical catheter insertion and displaced catheter reposition in our center. In this study, we further explored the possibility of applying the Wang's forceps in the procedure of percutaneous catheter insertion both in porcine model and patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD). A total of three miniature pigs successfully received percutaneous catheter insertion using Seldinger's technique with Wang's forceps assistance. The catheters were all placed in the right position and functioning well in dialysate drainage. This novel method of percutaneous catheter insertion was then performed on 20 ESRD patients. The procedure showed effective time-saving with the average operating time of 29.2 ± 3.53 min and was well tolerated by patients with minimal pain and injury. During a follow-up time of 6 months, no complications of catheter displacement, leakage, or blockade occurred. Our preliminary observation demonstrates that utilization of Wang's forceps in a percutaneous procedure conferred benefits of accurately placing and fixing catheters while preserving the merits of minimal invasion and simple performance.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Placement of a Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter and Outcomes: The CAPD I Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the best operation technique, open versus laparoscopic, for insertion of a peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter with regard to clinical success. Clinical success was defined as an adequate function of the catheter 2 - 4 weeks after insertion.

METHODS

All patients with end-stage renal disease who were suitable for PD and gave informed consent were randomized for either open surgery or laparoscopic surgery. A previous laparotomy was not considered an exclusion criterion. Laparoscopic placement had the advantage of pre-peritoneal tunneling, the possibility for adhesiolysis, and placement of the catheter under direct vision. Catheter fixation techniques, omentopexy, or other adjunct procedures were not performed. Other measured parameters were in-hospital morbidity and mortality and post-operative infections.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2016, 95 patients were randomized to this study protocol. After exclusion of 5 patients for various reasons, 44 patients received an open procedure and 46 patients a laparoscopic procedure. Gender, age, body mass index (BMI), hypertension, current hemodialysis, severe heart failure, and previous an abdominal operation were not significantly different between the groups. However, in the open surgery group, fewer patients had a previous median laparotomy compared with the laparoscopic group (6 vs 16 patients; p = 0.027). There was no statistically significant difference in mean operation time (36 ± 24 vs 38 ± 15 minutes) and hospital stay (2.1 ± 2.7 vs 3.1 ± 7.3 days) between the groups. In the open surgery group 77% of the patients had an adequate functioning catheter 2 - 4 weeks after insertion compared with 70% of patients in the laparoscopic group (p = not significant [NS]). In the open surgery group there was 1 post-operative death (2%) compared with none in the laparoscopic group (p = NS). The morbidity in both groups was low and not significantly different. In the open surgery group, 2 patients had an exit-site infection and 1 patient had a paramedian wound infection. In the laparoscopic group, 1 patient had a transient cardiac event, 1 patient had intraabdominal bleeding requiring reoperation, and 1 patient had fluid leakage that could be managed conservatively. The survival curve demonstrated a good long-term function of PD.

CONCLUSION

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing open vs laparoscopic placement of PD catheters demonstrates equal clinical success rates between the 2 techniques. Advanced laparoscopic techniques such as catheter fixation techniques and omentopexy might further improve clinical outcome.

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.

A contemporary approach to the prevention of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis in children: the role of improvement science

Peritonitis is a leading cause of hospitalizations, morbidity, and modality change in pediatric chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) patients. Despite guidelines published by the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis aimed at reducing the risk of peritonitis, registry data have revealed significant variability in peritonitis rates among centers caring for children on CPD, which suggests variability in practice. Improvement science methods have been used to reduce a variety of healthcare-associated infections and are also being applied successfully to decrease rates of peritonitis in children. A successful quality improvement program with the goal of decreasing peritonitis will not only include primary drivers directly linked to the outcome of peritonitis, but will also direct attention to secondary drivers that are important for the achievement of primary drivers, such as health literacy and patient and family engagement strategies. In this review, we describe a comprehensive improvement science model for the reduction of peritonitis in pediatric patients on CPD.

Long-Term Outcomes of Single-Port Laparoscopic Placement of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic insertion of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter has become a preferred method compared to the traditional open technique for PD catheter insertion. We retrospectively report the outcome of 1-port laparoscopic placement PD catheters in our institution.

METHODS

A total of 263 patients with end-stage renal disease who underwent single-trocar laparoscopic PD catheter insertion during a recent 6-year period were reviewed. Laparoscopic technique involves introducing a PD catheter over a stiff guidewire into the abdominal cavity through a 10-mm laparoscopic port. Pertinent clinical variables, procedural complications, and follow-up outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 182 men and 81 women. The mean age was 56 years. Technical success was 95.8%. Catheter occlusion was the most common early complications (<6 months) that occurred in 4 (1.5%) patients. Late complications (> 6 months) including catheter occlusion, cuff extrusion, catheter leakage, catheter migration, infection, and hernia occurred in 5 patients (1.9%), 2 patients (0.8%), 3 patients (1.1%), 3 patients (1.1%), 6 patients (2.3%), and 4 patients (1.5), respectively. Mean follow-up time was 39 ± 18 months. Catheter survival rate at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years was 96%, 94%, 90%, 85%, and 82%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic PD catheter implantation via a single-trocar utilizing a stiff guidewire technique is feasible and safe. This method can result in low complication and high catheter survival rate.

Outcomes after peritoneal dialysis catheter placement

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to review surgical outcomes after elective placement of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters in children with end-stage renal disease.

METHODS

Children with PD catheters placed between February 2002 and July 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes were catheter life, late (>30days post-op) complications (catheter malfunction, catheter malposition, infection), and re-operation rates. Comparison groups included laparoscopic versus open placement, age<2, and weight<10kg. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen patients had 173 catheters placed (122 open, 51 laparoscopic) with an average patient age of 9.7±6.3years. Mean catheter life was similar in the laparoscopic and open groups (581±539days versus 574±487days, p=0.938). The late complication rate was higher for open procedures (57% versus 37%, p=0.013). Children age<2 or weight<10kg had higher re-operation rates (64% versus 42%, p=0.014 and 73% versus 40%, p=0.001, respectively). Adjusted for age and weight, open technique remained a risk factor for late complications (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.20-4.95) but not re-operation.

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic placement appears to reduce the rate of late complications in children who require PD dialysis catheters. Children <2years age or <10kg remain at risk for complications regardless of technique.

Introduction of a new laparoscopic trocar for insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters and making a proper rectus sheath tunneling

BACKGROUND

Using a proper laparoscopic trocar for making a downward rectus sheet tunneling (RSHT) during the implementation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters leads to a longer survival of catheter and less catheter dysfunction. As no specific laparoscopic trocar has been invented for insertion of PD catheters, we designed a new trocar. In this article, we describe specifications of our new invented trocar for the first time. We will describe our experience with it in our patients as well.

METHODS

The new stainless steel trocar includes a cannula and a mandarin. The cannula consists of a tube pipe and head. The tube pipe is so long that is proper for rectus sheet tunneling, and its internal diameter is fitted for easy passage of the catheter with its cuffs. The head consists of two steel parts holding a unidirectional plastic valve preventing backflow of the air. The mandarin section includes a sharp shaft and a metal cap. The distal end of the mandarin is an atraumatic conical tip which was designed to make a safe RSHT.

RESULTS

A total of 30 PD catheters were successfully implanted through 30 laparoscopic procedures in 12 males and 18 females (mean age 48.16 ± 14.18 years). All catheters were successfully inserted without any intraoperative complication. Exit-site infection, peri-catheter leakage, and outflow failure were found in two, one, and one patient, respectively. We did not find any inflow failure, catheter malpositioning, migration, or kinking. No other complication was observed during the 1-year follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The new designed PD trocar is a proper port for laparoscopic implantation of the peritoneal dialysis catheter. It is a safe and easy handle trocar that helps surgeons to make an appropriate rectus sheath tunneling with minimal complications.

Peritoneal dialysis catheter placement technique and complications

Background. This review describes the peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter implantation techniques for the treatment of PD. The PD catheter-related complications still cause significant morbidity and mortality, resulting in the necessity to switch to haemodialysis (HD) treatment. Methods. Several catheter insertion techniques, using an open surgical approach, laparoscopic and percutaneous techniques have been employed, with their specific early and late complications and failure rates. Results. Despite the similar outcomes of open surgical versus laparoscopic techniques from randomized studies, the laparoscopic insertion has the major advantage of correct catheter positioning in the lower abdomen, with the possibility of adhesiolysis. The minimal invasive percutaneous insertion bears the risk of bowel perforation and catheter malpositioning, and the outcome of this technique is strongly related to the experience of the surgeon. The major complications of these implantation techniques, like bleeding, dialysate leakage and catheter malpositioning, and their management are discussed in our study. Late peritonitis remains the major drawback of PD treatment, with the need of temporary or permanent changeover to the HD treatment in 10% of the patients. Conclusions. Enrichment of the physician's interest and experience, along with a multidisciplinary approach to outline the optimal strategy of PD-catheter insertion and complication of the treatment, may improve the patients' survival and decrease the morbidity.

Flexible endoscopic single-incision extraperitoneal implant and fixation of peritoneal dialysis catheter: proof of concept in the porcine model

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters placed in the pelvic space without anchoring present a high rate of migration. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a single-incision approach, using a flexible endoscopic preperitoneal tunneling for catheter implantation and fixation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight pigs were involved in this experimental study. A 2/0 Vicryl loop was sutured at the tip of a PD catheter. In 4 pigs, a 1.5 cm incision was made on the left paramedian line and the parietal peritoneal layer was identified by splitting rectal muscles. A gastroscope was inserted in the incision and advanced in the extraperitoneal space. An exit hole was made in the peritoneum over the low pelvic cavity. A guidewire was left in the abdominal cavity, and the PD catheter was inserted over the guidewire. The endoscope was inserted in the tunnel again, and endoscopic clips were deployed over the Vicryl loop to fix the catheter. In 4 pigs, the PD catheter was inserted laparoscopically using a two-port approach. The catheter's tip was fixed with laparoscopic clips on the Vicryl loop. A strain test to assess the force required to detach clips was performed using a digital dynamometer.

RESULTS

Operative time for flexible endoscopic tunneling was longer when compared to the laparoscopic implant (29.5 ± 4.43 vs. 22.7 ± 2.51 min). Mean force to displace the catheter was similar after flexible endoscopic fixation when compared to laparoscopic clip fixation (5.57 N ± 2.76 vs. 4.15 N ± 1.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Flexible endoscopic extraperitoneal tunneling allows for minimally invasive single-incision PD catheter placement and fixation.