Yonsei medical journal · 2015
Modified Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: Comparison with a Conventional Method.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Yong Kyu, Yang Pil-Sung, Park Kyoung Sook, Choi Kyu Hun, Kim Beom Seok
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The conventional trocar and cannula method in peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion has its limitation in clinical setting. The aim of this study was to compare a modified method for percutaneous PD catheter insertion with the conventional method, and demonstrate advantages of the modified method.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients at a single center who had percutaneous PD catheters inserted by nephrologists from January 2006 until September 2012, using either a modified method (group M) or the conventional trocar and cannula method (group C), were retrospectively analyzed, in terms of baseline characteristics, complications experienced up to 3 months after the procedure, and the suitability of the procedure for patients.
RESULTS: Group M included 82 subjects, while group C included 66 cases. The overall early complication rate in group M (1.2%) was significantly lower than that in group C (19.7%) (p<0.001). The catheter revision rate during timeframe for early complications was significantly lower in group M (0%) than in group C (6.1%) (p=0.024). When comparing Procedure time (1 h 3 min±16 min vs. 1 h 36 min±19 min, p<0.01), immediate post-procedural pain (2.43±1.80 vs. 3.14±2.07, p<0.05), and post-procedure days until ambulation (3.95±1.13 days vs. 6.17±1.34 days, p<0.01), group M was significantly lower than group C. There was no significant difference in total hospitalization period (14.71±7.05 days vs. 13.86±3.7 days).
CONCLUSION: Our modified PD catheter insertion method shows its advantages in early complication rate, early complications revision rate, and the patients' conveniences.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients at a single center who had percutaneous PD catheters inserted by nephrologists from January 2006 until September 2012, using either a modified method (group M) or the conventional trocar and cannula method (group C), were retrospectively analyzed, in terms of baseline characteristics, complications experienced up to 3 months after the procedure, and the suitability of the procedure for patients.
RESULTS: Group M included 82 subjects, while group C included 66 cases. The overall early complication rate in group M (1.2%) was significantly lower than that in group C (19.7%) (p<0.001). The catheter revision rate during timeframe for early complications was significantly lower in group M (0%) than in group C (6.1%) (p=0.024). When comparing Procedure time (1 h 3 min±16 min vs. 1 h 36 min±19 min, p<0.01), immediate post-procedural pain (2.43±1.80 vs. 3.14±2.07, p<0.05), and post-procedure days until ambulation (3.95±1.13 days vs. 6.17±1.34 days, p<0.01), group M was significantly lower than group C. There was no significant difference in total hospitalization period (14.71±7.05 days vs. 13.86±3.7 days).
CONCLUSION: Our modified PD catheter insertion method shows its advantages in early complication rate, early complications revision rate, and the patients' conveniences.