Outcomes of tunneled cuffed hemodialysis catheters: An experience from a tertiary care center in Karachi, Pakistan

Bacteremia and Mortality among Patients with Nontunneled and Tunneled Catheters for Hemodialysis

Introduction

Central venous catheters for hemodialysis (HD) can be nontunneled catheters (NTC) or tunneled catheters (TC). Bacteremia and dysfunction are complications that can impact morbidity and mortality. We decided to compare the rates of bacteremia and dysfunction between NTC and TC and patient survival 90 days after catheter insertion.

Methods

Retrospective cohort to evaluate catheters inserted between January 2011 and December 2020 in a tertiary hospital. Catheters in patients with end-stage chronic kidney disease were included. Patients with acute kidney injury, catheters that lasted less than three HD sessions, and patients who died within one week after insertion were excluded. Bacteremia and dysfunction rates, bacteremia-free survival, and dysfunction-free survival were investigated. Multivariable analysis was performed using a Cox proportional hazards regression model for patient survival at 90 days.

Results

670 catheters were analyzed in 287 patients, 422 NTC (63%), and 248 TC (37%). The rates of confirmed bacteremia per 1,000 catheter-days were 1.19 for NTC and 0.20 for TC (p < 0.0001). The confirmed or possible bacteremia rates were 2.27 and 0.37 per 1,000 catheter-days for NTC and TC, respectively (p < 0.0001). The dysfunction rates were 3.96 and 0.86 for NTC and TC, respectively (p < 0.0001). Patient survival at 90 days was higher in the TC group than the NTC group (96.8% vs. 89.1%; p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

We found lower rates of bacteremia and dysfunction for TC and demonstrated that using NTC affects patient mortality.

[Catheter Replacement Methods in Hemodialysis Patients With Dysfunctional Tunneled-Cuffed Catheters With Fibrin Sheaths]

Objective

Tunneled-cuffed catheters (TCCs) are frequently used for establishing hemodialysis access for maintenance hemodialysis in older patients with exhausted resources of peripheral vessels. Fibrin sheath formation around the catheter is one of the most common complications of long-term use of indwelling catheter, which may cause the malfunction of the catheter. In this study, we intend to compare the prognosis of two catheter replacement methods, in situ replacement and replacement through a fibrin sheath crevice, with both being assisted by balloon dilation, and to explore the optimal catheter replacement process.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted with 52 patients who underwent a replacement of their TCCs. Among them, 27 cases had their TCC replaced by the modified method of replacement through a fibrin sheath crevice and were referred to as the sheath crevice group, while 25 cases underwent in situ catheter replacement and were referred to as the in situ group. The primary outcome indicators included maximum blood flow in hemodialysis catheter and the urea clearance rate calculated by Kt/V values at the 1, 3, and 6-month follow-ups. The secondary outcomes included dialyzer alarms being set off and catheter-related infections during follow-up.

Results

There was no significant difference between the general data of the two groups. There was no massive blood loss during the replacement procedure. Neither were there cardiac tamponade, catheter-associated infections, or other complications. Follow-ups were made 1, 3, and 6 months after the replacement procedure. The sheath crevice group had higher catheter blood flow and Kt/V values at the 6-month follow-up than the in situ group did ([241.85±9.62] mL/min vs. [234.40±11.21] mL/min, P=0.014 and 1.31±0.55 vs. 1.27±0.49, P=0.005, respectively). During the follow-up process, access alarms were reported in 5 patients (three in the in situ group and two in the sheath crevice group) during dialysis. No catheter-associated infection occurred in either group.

Conclusion

The catheter replacement method of balloon dilation-assisted catheter insertion through a fibrin sheath crevice is safe and effective, resulting in better long-term catheter blood flow compared with that of in situ catheter replacement.