medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Cirugía y Cirujanos

  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Authors instructions        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2004, Number 3

Cir Cir 2004; 72 (3)

Approach through midline or para-median in the insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter in patients with ambulatory continuous peritoneal dialysis. Comparative study

Valdivia-Gómez GG, Jaramillo-de la Torre E
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 193-201
PDF size: 86.95 Kb.


Key words:

Tenckhoff catheter, peritoneal dialysis treatment, chronic renal insufficiency.

ABSTRACT

Hypothesis: Insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter through a small para-median incision results in less catheter dysfunction than in cases where insertion is made through a midline incision. Material and methods: This is a prospective, longitudinal, comparative, observational study of cause and effect; in other words, it is a study of two cohorts. The study included patients with chronic renal insufficiency aged 16 years and over of either sex who required insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter for peritoneal dialysis treatment. A total of 44 patients were recruited and were divided randomly into two groups: Group A, numbering 23 patients, had their catheter inserted through midline below umbilicus, while Group B numbering 21 patients had their catheter inserted through via para-median approach. The study employed Student t parametric test and chi square trial hypothesis for non-parametric variables. Rejection criterion was p < 0.05. Results: In both groups, cause of chronic renal insufficiency was diabetic nephropathy. After a 30-day follow-up period, the group of patients with catheter inserted through midline incision, i.e., Group A, presented dysfunction in 43.5% of cases. In the group with catheter inserted through para-median incision, i.e., Group B, dysfunction presented in 38% of cases with no other significant statistical difference occurring. Main cause of dysfunction occurring in Group A was catheter migration, whereas in Group B the main cause was dialysis fluid leakage. Conclusions: This study concluded that there was no significant difference between the two surgical techniques employed for Tenckhoff catheter insertion with regard to incidence of catheter migration, leakage of dialysis solution, catheter obstruction due to adhesions, or post-incisional hernias during the immediate post-surgical period (30 days). Furthermore, no significant difference was found between the two groups with respect to other types of complications such as peritonitis, infection along the subcutaneous catheter pathway, or catheter obstruction due to blood clots.


REFERENCES

  1. Tenckhoff H. Peritoneal dialysis today: a new look. Nephron 1974; 12:420-436.

  2. Cronen PW, Moss JP, Simpson T, et al. Tenckhoff catheter placement: surgical aspects. Am Surg 1985;51:627-629.

  3. Popovich RP, Moncrief JW, Nolph KD, et al. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Ann Intern Med 1978;88:449-456.

  4. Guzmán G. Aspectos quirúrgicos de la diálisis peritoneal continua ambulatoria (DPCA). Ciruj Gen 1995;17:30-33.

  5. Devine H, Oreopoulos DG, Izatt S, et al. The permanent Tenckhoff catheter for chronic peritoneal dialysis. Can Med Assoc J 1975;113:219-221.

  6. Spence PA, Mathews RE, Khanna R, et al. Improved results with a paramedian technique for the insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1985;161:585-587.

  7. Bullmaster JR, Miller SF, Finley RK, et al. Surgical aspects of the Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter. A 7 year experience. Am J Surg 1985;149:339-342.

  8. Olcott C, Feldman CA, Coplon NS, et al. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Technique of catheter insertion and management of associated surgical complications. Am J Surg 1983;146:98-102.

  9. Hwang TL, Chen MF, Wu CH, et al. Comparison for four techniques of catheter insertion in patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Eur J Surg 1995;161:401-404.

  10. Yeh TJ, Wei CF, Chin TW. Catheter-related complications of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Eur J Surg 1992;158:277-279.

  11. Apostolidis NS, Tzardis PJ, Manouras AJ, et al. The incidence of postoperative hernia as related to the site of insertion of permanent peritoneal catheter. Am Surg 1988;54:318-319.

  12. Fleisher AG, Kimmeistiel FM, Lattes CG, et al. Surgical complications of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Am J Surg 1985;149:726-729.

  13. Davis R, Young J, Diamond D, et al. Management of chronic peritoneal catheter malfunction. Am J Nephrol 1982;2:85-90.

  14. Francis DMA, Donnelly PK, Veitch PS. Surgical aspects of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (3 years experience). Br J Surg 1984;71:225-229.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

CÓMO CITAR (Vancouver)

Cir Cir. 2004;72