Bravo-Arriola E, Zárraga-Rodríguez JL, Serrano-Lozano JA

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 68-75
PDF size: 196.29 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objetive. Apply a validated therapeutic guide for central venous access placement in patients in chronic haemodialysis was obtained a more effective method of selecting puncture site in patients with chronic renal failure and multiple previous central venous access.
Material and methods. Clinical study with random assignment in patients with chronic renal failure of any age who require hemodialysis and requiring central venous long term catheter, with a history of more than two previous access where applicable validated therapeutic guide in the selection of puncture site for such access.
Results. Twenty-seven patients were divided randomly into two groups. Group 1: in it puncture site selection was directed by clinical guide (n = 14) and group 2: the selection of punture site was chose at the discretion of the attending physians (n = 13). No significant difference was found between the characteristics of both groups. In group 1, technical success in 14 patients. In group 2: Doppler study was performed in all cases and venography was performed only in two patients. Technical success was in 11 patients, two patients required change the puncture site for the procedure because superior vena cava obstruction was identify and relocation into a femoral puncture was need.
Conclusions. In patients with long term central venous access and need a new central venous Access, technical success was achieve by applying the validated therapeutic guide in all cases. The application of technical guidelines is helpful, unifying criteria for placement long term catheter in angiology services.

REFERENCES

1. Canaud B, Leray-Moragues, et al. Permanent twin catheter: a vascular access option of choice for haemodialysis in elderly patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13(Suppl. 7): 82-8.

2. Gabriele D. Luigi Cali. Thrombosis of tunnled-cuffed hemodialysis catheters: treatment with high-dose urokinase lock therapy. Artif organs 2012; 36(1).

3. Reheela R. Rebeca J, S. Ethical and legal obligation to avoid long-term tunneled catheter access. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 4: 456-60.

4. Thrush A, et al. Peripheral Vascular Ultrasound (how, why and when). 2nd Ed. 2005.

5. Scott S. Berman. Vascular access in clinical practice. New York: Marccel Dekker; 2002.

6. Alun HD, et al. Vascular surgery. London: Springer- Verlag; 2006, p. 141-8.

7. Zeynep, et al. Does bilateral superficial cervical plexus block decrease analgesic requirement after tyroid surgery? Anesth Ann 2006; 102: 174-6. Bravo-Arriola E y cols. Selección del sitio de punción para accesos venosos centrales. Rev Mex Angol 2014; 42(2): 68-75 75

8. National Kidney Foundation. 2006 updates Clinical practice and recommendation for vascular access.

9. Cronewett, Johinston. Vascular surgery. 7th Ed. 2007.

10. Naomi P. O’Grady, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Department of Heal & Human Services. USA, CDC. 2011.

11. Wong JK, Sadler DJ, et al. Analysis of early failure of tunneled hemodialysis catheters. AJR 2002.

12. Shaldon, et al. Refrigerated femoral venous venous haemodialysis with coil preservation for rehabilitation of terminal uremic patients. Br Med J 1964; 2: 411-3.

13. Olivier Chavanon. Successful prolonged use of an intracardiac catheter for dialysis. Nephroil Dial Transplant 1999; 14: 2015-6.