The ideal method for inserting continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters remains debatable. Minimally invasive techniques are becoming more popular. The routine recommendation for starting PD is 4 – 6 weeks after catheter insertion. We planned a prospective study to evaluate whether this waiting period is necessary. From January 2003 to July 2004, 42 double-cuff Tenckhoff CAPD catheters were inserted into 41 patients. Percutaneous technique was used and PD was started on the sixth day. Only 2 pericatheter leakages (4.8%) were detected. This procedure is comparatively safe, simple, and less costly than surgical and peritoneoscopic placement. The rate of early pericatheter leakage may be lowered with this technique and PD may be started earlier.
HwangT.L., ChenM.F., WuC.H., LeuM.O., HuangC.C.Comparison for four techniques of catheter insertion in patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.Eur J Surg1995; 161: 401–4.
2.
KubotaM., KanazawaM., TakahashiY., IoH., IshiguroN., TominoY.Implantation of presternal catheter using Moncrief technique: Aiming for fewer catheter-related complications.Perit Dial Int2001; 21(Suppl 3): S205–8.
3.
CrabtreeJ.H., FishmanA.A laparoscopic approach under local anesthesia for peritoneal dialysis access.Perit Dial Int2000; 20: 757–65.
4.
GadallahM.F., PervezA., el-ShahawyM.A., SorrelsD., ZibariG., McDonaldJ.Peritoneoscopic versus surgical placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: A prospective randomized study on outcome.Am J Kidney Dis1999; 33: 118–22.
5.
BullmasterJ.R., MillerS.F., FinleyR.K.Jr., JonesL.M.Surgical aspects of the Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter. A 7 year experience.Am J Surg1985; 149: 339–42.
MellotteG.J., HoC.A., MorganS.H., BendingM.R., EisingerA.J.Peritoneal dialysis catheters: A comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques.Nephrol Dial Transplant1993; 8: 626–30.
8.
HandtA.E., AshS.R.Longevity of Tenckhoff catheters placed by the VITEC™ peritoneoscopic technique.Perspectives in Peritoneal Dialysis1984; 2: 30–3.
9.
TsimoyiannisE.C., SiakasP., GlantzonuisG., ToliC., SferopoulosG., PappasM.Laparoscopic placement of the Tenckhoff catheter for peritoneal dialysis.Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2000; 10: 218–21.
10.
NolphK.D., BoenF.S., FarrellP.C., PyleK.W.Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Australia, Europe and United States: 1981.Kidney Int1983; 23: 3–8.
11.
HwangS.D., LeeH.B.Infectious complications during continuous peritoneal ambulatory dialysis.The Korean Journal of Nephrology1985; 4(Suppl): S60–6.
12.
RobertM.S.Status of peritoneal dialysis in the U.S. (Part I).Dialysis & Transplantation1996; 25: 814–21.
13.
AbrahamG., SavinE., AyiomamitisA., SharronI., VasS.I., MathewsR.E.Natural history of exit-site infection (ESI) in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.Perit Dial Int1988; 8: 211–16.
14.
ParkM.S., YimA.S., ChungS.H., LeeE.Y., ChaM.K., KimJ.H.Effect of prolonged subcutaneous implantation of peritoneal catheter on peritonitis rate during CAPD: A prospective randomized study.Blood Purif1998; 16: 171–8.
15.
GuptaB., BernardiniJ., PirainoB.Peritonitis associated with exit site and tunnel infections.Am J Kidney Dis1996; 28: 415–19.
16.
MoncriefJ.W., PopovichR.P., DasguptaM., CostertonJ.W., SimmonsE., MoncriefB.Reduction in peritonitis incidence in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis with a new catheter and implantation technique.Perit Dial Int1993; 13(Suppl 2): S329–31.
17.
DanielssonA., BlohmeL., TranaeusA., HylanderB.A prospective randomized study of the effect of a subcutaneously “buried” peritoneal dialysis catheter technique versus standard technique on the incidence of peritonitis and exit-site infection.Perit Dial Int2002; 22: 211–19.
18.
Diaz-BuxoJ.A.Mechanical complications of chronic peritoneal dialysis catheters.Semin Dial1991; 4: 106–11.
19.
EjlersenE., StevenK., LokkegaardH.Paramedian versus midline incision for the insertion of permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters. A randomized clinical trial.Scand J Nephrol1990; 24: 151–4.
