The percutaneous Seldinger method of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion has gained favor over recent years whereas traditionally it was reserved for patients considered not fit for general anesthesia. This blind technique is believed to be less safe, and is hence avoided in patients with previous laparotomy incisions. Reports on the success of this method may therefore be criticized for selection bias. In those with no prior abdominal surgery the optimal method of insertion has not been established.
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of first-time PDC placements comparing the percutaneous (group P) and surgical (group S) insertion techniques in patients without a history of previous abdominal surgery in a single center between January 2003 and June 2010. We assessed catheter survival at 3 and 12 months post-insertion and compared complication rates between the two groups.
Results
A total of 63 percutaneous and 64 surgical catheter insertions were analyzed. No significant difference was noted in catheter survival rates between group P and group S (86.2% vs 80% at 3 months, p = 0.37; and 78.3% vs 71.2% at 12 months, p = 0.42 respectively). Early and overall peritonitis rates were similar (5% vs 5.3%; p = 1, and 3.5 vs 4.9 episodes per 100 patient-months; p = 0.13 for group P and group S respectively). There were also no significant differences between the two groups in exit site leaks (15.9% in group P vs 6.3% in group S; p = 0.15), poor initial drainage (9.5% in group P vs 10.9% in group S, p = 0.34) or secondary drainage failure (7.9% in group P vs 18.8% in group S, p = 0.09).
Conclusion
This study illustrates the success and safety of percutaneous PDC insertion compared with the open surgical technique in PD naive patients without a history of prior abdominal surgery. Catheter survival was favorable with percutaneous insertion in this low-risk patient population but larger prospective studies may help to determine whether either method is superior. The percutaneous technique can be recommended as a minimally invasive, cost-effective procedure that facilitates implementing an integrated care model in nephrology practice.
BlakeP.G.The critical importance of good peritoneal catheter placement.Perit Dial Int2008; 28: 111–2.
2.
FigueiredoA., GohB.L., JenkinsS., JohnsonD.W., MactierR., RamalakshmiS. on behalf of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis. Clinical practice guidelines for peritoneal access.Perit Dial Int2010; 30: 424–9.
3.
WongL., LiebmanS., WakefieldK., MessingS.Training of surgeons in peritoneal dialysis catheter placement in the United States: a national survey.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2010; 5: 1439–46.
4.
WilkieM., WildJ.Peritoneal dialysis access – results from a UK survey.Perit Dial Int2009; 29: 355–7.
5.
CrabtreeJ.H.Who should place peritoneal dialysis catheters?Perit Dial Int2010; 30(2): 142–50.
6.
HendersonS., BrownE., LevyJ.Safety and efficacy of percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters under sedation and local anaesthetic.Nephrol Dial Transplant2009; 24: 3499–509.
7.
OzenerC., BihoracA., AkogluE.Technical survival of CAPD catheters: comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques.Nephrol Dial Transplant2001; 16: 1893–9.
8.
MedaniS., ShantierM., HusseinW., WallC., MellotteG.A comparative analysis of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for peritoneal catheter placement.Perit Dial Int2012; 32: 628–35.
SmithS.A., MorganS.H., EastwoodJ.B.Routine percutaneous insertion of permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters on the nephrology ward.Perit Dial Int1994; 14: 284–6.
11.
AtesK., ErturkS., KaratanO., DumanN., NergisogluG., AyliD.A comparison between percutaneous and surgical placement techniques for permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters.Nephron1997; 75: 98–9.
12.
EuthimiadouA., ThodisE., PassadakisP., TsalikisD., KaisasG., VargemezisV.Nonsurgical implantation of Tenckhoff peritoneal catheters in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.Adv Perit Dial1999; 15: 101–4.
13.
RoueffS., PagniezD., MoranneO., RoumilhacD., TalaszkaA., Le Monies De SagazanH.Simplified percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: comparison with surgical placement.Perit Dial Int2002; 22: 267–9.
14.
BasileC., De PadovaF., ParisiA., MontanaroA., GiordanoR.Routine insertion of permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters in the nephrology ward. The sliding percutaneous technique.Minerva Urol Nefrol2004; 56: 359–65.
15.
PerakisK.E., StylianouK.G., KyriazisJ.P.Long-term complication rates and survival of peritoneal dialysis catheters: the role of percutaneous versus surgical placement.Semin Dial2009; 22: 569–75.
16.
JoY.I., ShinS.K., LeeJ.H., SongJ.O., ParkJ.H.Immediate initiation of CAPD following percutaneous catheter placement without break-in procedure.Perit Dial Int.2007; 27: 179–83.
17.
TiongH.Y., PohJ., SunderarajK., WuY.J., ConsigliereD.T.Surgical complications of Tenckhoff catheters used in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.Singapore Med J2006; 47: 707–11.
CrabtreeJ.H., BourchetteR.J.Effect of prior abdominal surgery, peritonitis, and adhesions on catheter function and long-term outcome on peritoneal dialysis.Am Surg2009; 75: 140–7.
20.
KeshvariA., FazeliM.S., MeysamieA., SeifiS., TaromlooM.K.The effects of previous abdominal operations and intraperitoneal adhesions on the outcome of peritoneal dialysis catheters.Perit Dial Int2010; 30: 41–5.
21.
DombrosN., DratwaM., FerianiM., GokalR., HeimburgerO., KredietR.; EBPG Expert Group on Peritoneal Dialysis. European best practice guidelines for peritoneal dialysis. 3 Peritoneal access.Nephrol Dial Transplant2005; 20(Suppl 9): ix8–12.
22.
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.
23.
HadimeriH., JohanssonA.C., HaraldssonB., NybergG.CAPD in patients with autosomal polycystic kidney disease.Perit Dial Int1998; 18: 429–32.
24.
KumarS., FanS.L., RafteryM.J., YaqoobM.M.Long term outcome of patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney diseases receiving peritoneal dialysis.Kidney Int2008 Oct; 74: 946–51.
25.
LobbedezT., TouamM., EvansD., RyckelynckJ.P., KnebelmanB., VergerC.Peritoneal dialysis in polycystic kidney disease patients. Report from the French peritoneal dialysis registry (RDPLF).Nephrol Dial Transplant2011; 26: 2332–9.
26.
LiL., SzetoC.C., KwanB.C., ChowK.M., LeungC.B., Kam-Tao LiP.Peritoneal dialysis as the first-line renal replacement therapy in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease.Am J Kidney Dis2011; 57: 903–7.
27.
PortolesJ.M., TatoA.M., López-SánchezP.Peritoneal dialysis for patients with polycystic kidney disease in Spain.Am J Kidney Dis2011; 58: 493; author reply 494.
28.
PandyaB.K., FriedeT., WilliamsJ.D.A comparison of peritonitis in polycystic and non-polycystic patients on peritoneal dialysis.Perit Dial Int2004; 24: 79–81.
29.
CrabtreeJ.H.Selected best demonstrated practices in peritoneal dialysis access.Kidney Int2006; 70: S27–37.
30.
CrabtreeJ.H.Fluoroscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a harvest of the low-hanging fruits.Perit Dial Int2008; 28(2): 134–7.
NakanishiT., YanaseM., FujiiM., TanakaY., OritaY., AbeH.New acute peritoneal dialysis technique: wire-guide insertion and long-term indwelling of peritoneal catheter.Nephron1984; 37: 128–132.
33.
GonzalezA.R., GoltzG.M., EatonC.L., RatajeskiG., OlinJ.W.The peel away method for insertion of Tenckhoff catheters.Kidney Int1984; 25: 256.
34.
PerrasS., ZappacostaA.R., MatternM.Comparison of two techniques for percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter placement.ANNA J1985; 12: 307–10.
35.
UpdikeS., O'BrienM., PetersenW., ZimmermanS.Placement of catheter using pacemaker-like introducer with peelaway sleeve.Kidney Int1985; 27: 185.
36.
Di PaoloN., ManganelliA., StrappavecciaF., De MiaM., GaggiottiE.A new technique for insertion of the Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter.Nephron1985; 40: 485–7.
37.
AllonM., SoucieM., MaconElComplications with permanent peritoneal dialysis catheters: experience with 154 percutaneously placed catheters.Nephron1988; 48: 8–11.
38.
MaherE.R., StevensJ., MurphyC., BrownE.A.Comparison of two methods of Tenckhoff catheter insertion.Nephron1988; 48: 87–8.
NielsenP.K., HemmingsenC., FriisS.U., LadefogedJ., OlgaardK.Comparison of straight and curled Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheters implanted by percutaneous technique: a prospective randomized study.Perit Dial Int1995; 15: 18–21.
41.
DequidtC., VijtD., VeysN., Van BiesenW.Bed-side blind insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters.EDTNA ERCA J2003; 29: 137–9.
42.
LiberekT., ChmielewskiM., Lichodziejewska-NiemierkoM., RenkeM., ZadroznyD., RutkowskiB.Survival and function of Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter after surgical or percutaneous placement: one centre experience.Int J Artif Organs2003; 26: 174–5.
43.
BanliO., AltunH., OztemelA.Early start of CAPD with the Seldinger technique.Perit Dial Int2005; 25: 556–9.
44.
GadallahM.F., RamdeenG., Torres-RiveraC., IbrahimM.E., MyrickS., AndrewsG.Changing the trend: a prospective study on factors contributing to the growth rate of peritoneal dialysis programs.Adv Perit Dial2001; 17: 122–6.
45.
AsifA., ByersP., GadaleanF., RothD.Peritoneal dialysis underutilization: the impact of an interventional nephrology peritoneal dialysis access program.Semin Dial2003; 16: 266–71.
46.
AsifA., PfledererT.A., VieiraC.F., DiegoJ., RothD., AgarwalA.Does catheter insertion by nephrologists improve peritoneal dialysis utilization? A multicenter analysis.Semin Dial2005; 18: 157–60.
