Effects of different peritoneal dialysis catheterization techniques on the prognosis of patients: a meta-analysis

doi:10.12307/2021.074

Abstract

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: For peritoneal dialysis patients, the more therapeutic way of insertion catheterization techniques is controversial. There is no evidence of high-grade evidence-based medicine. This study systemically assessed influence of different insertion catheterization techniques on the prognosis of peritoneal dialysis patients, and reviewed the clinical value of percutaneous insertion catheterization in peritoneal dialysis.
METHODS: The PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases of cohort study literature on the comparison of percutaneous technique and surgical incision technique for peritoneal dialysis catheterization published from inception to October 30, 2019 were searched by computer. The effective data were selected and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality. Primary outcomes were infection complications, mechanical complications, 1-year peritoneal dialysis tube survival rate, and extubation rate caused by complications. The odds ratio (OR) was the effect indicator. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS: (1) A total of 12 studies were included, including 2 prospective cohort studies and 10 retrospective cohort studies. A total of 2 203 patients were enrolled, including 1 164 patients in the percutaneous puncture group and 1 039 patients in the peritoneal incision group. (2) The incidence of infection complications, the incidence of mechanical complications, and the 1-year catheter survival rate were not statistically significant between the percutaneous puncture group and the peritoneal incision group (OR=0.57, 95%CI:0.31-1.04, P=0.07: OR=0.88, 95%CI:0.77-1.09, P=0.25; OR=1.05, 95%CI:0.68-1.64, P=0.81). (3) The extubation rate caused by complications in the percutaneous puncture group was lower than in the peritoneal incision group (OR=0.59, 95%CI:0.47-0.74, P < 0.000 1). (4) Subgroup analysis results of cases of infection complications group and 1-year catheter survival rate group according to the type of study suggested that heterogeneity mainly came from retrospective study subgroups, and the meta-analysis results in each subgroup showed there was no significant difference between the two groups. (5) Funnel diagram analysis results showed mild publication bias in dialysis tube infection complications and 1-year survival rate of the included articles.
CONCLUSION: It is safe and effective to apply the peritoneal dialysis catheterization with a percutaneous insertion technique, and its clinical effects and prognosis are similar with the traditional open surgical technique. The percutaneous insertion technique could be an ideal alternative to the traditional one.

Key words: peritoneal dialysis catheter, renal failure, renal dialysis, percutaneous insertion, fluoroscopy-guided, laparotomy, open surgical insertion, meta-analysis

CLC Number:

Du Yuan, Jiang Hongwei, Li Chunqing, Xie Yan. Effects of different peritoneal dialysis catheterization techniques on the prognosis of patients: a meta-analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(28): 4567-4572.

Figures/Tables 8

References

[1] CRABTREE JH, CHOW KM. Peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. Semin nephrol. 2017;37(1):17-29.
[2] PYART R, DONOVAN K, CARRINGTON C, et al. Peritoneal dialysis: turning choice into reality. Perit Dial int. 2018;38(5):328-333.
[3] MEDANI S, SHANTIER M, HUSSEIN W, et al. A comparative analysis of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for peritoneal catheter placement. Perit Dial Int. 2012;32(6):628-635.
[4] OUYANG CJ, HUANG FX, YANG QQ, et al. Comparing the incidence of catheter-related complications with straight and coiled tenckhoff catheters in peritoneal dialysis patients-a single-center prospective randomized trial. Perit Dial Int. 2015;35(4):443-449.
[5] SHANMUGALINGAM R, MAKRIS A, HASSAN HC, et al. The utility of sonographic assessment in selecting patients for percutaneous insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter. Perit Dial Int. 2017;37(4):434-442.
[6] SALGAONKAR HP, BEHERA R R, SHARMA PC, et al. Minimally invasive surgery for salvage of malfunctioning peritoneal dialysis catheters. J Minim Access Surg. 2019;15(1):19-24.
[7] PERL J, PIERRATOS A, KANDASAMY G, et al. Peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation by nephrologists is associated with higher rates of peritoneal dialysis utilization: a population-based study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015;30(2):301-309.
[8] OZENER C, BIHORAC A, AKOGLU E. Technical survival of CAPD catheters: comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2001;16(9):1893-1899.
[9] 中国超重/肥胖医学营养治疗专家共识编写委员会.中国超重/肥胖医学营养治疗专家共识(2016年版)[J].中华糖尿病杂志,2016,8(9): 525-540.
[10] COOK DA, REED DA. Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education. Acad Med. 2015;90(8):1067-1076.
[11] ROUEFF S, PAGNIEZ D, MORANNE O, et al. Simplified percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: comparison with surgical placement. Perit Dial Int. 2002;22(2):267-269.
[12] PERAKIS KE, STYLIANOU KG, KYRIAZIS JP, et al. Long-term complication rates and survival of peritoneal dialysis catheters: the role of percutaneous versus surgical placement. Seminars in Dialysis. 2009;22(5): 569-575.
[13] ATAPOUR A, ASADABADI H R, KARIMI S, et al. Comparing the outcomes of open surgical procedure and percutaneously peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion using laparoscopic needle: a two month follow-up study. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(4):463-468.
[14] 韩庆烽,孙玲华,聂建东,等.经皮穿刺腹膜透析置管术的临床应用[J].中国血液净化,2014, 13(10):686-688.
[15] MEDANI S, HUSSEIN W, SHANTIER M, et al. Comparison of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for first-time peritoneal dialysis catheter placement in the unbreached peritoneum. Perit Dial Int. 2015;35(5):576-585.
[16] CHULA DC, CAMPOS RP, DE ALCANTARA MT, et al. Percutaneous and surgical insertion of peritoneal catheter in patients starting in chronic dialysis therapy: a comparative study. Semin Dial. 2014; 27(3):E32-E37.
[17] NICHOLAS J, THOMAS M, ADKINS R, et al. Percutaneous and surgical peritoneal dialysis catheter placements have comparable outcomes in the modern era. Perit Dial Int. 2014;34(5):552-556.
[18] PARK YS, MIN SI, KIM DK, et al. The outcomes of percutaneous versus open placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. World J Surg. 2014; 38(5):1058-1064.
[19] SIVARAMAKRISHNAN R, GUPTA S, AGARWAL SK, et al. Comparison of outcomes between surgically placed and percutaneously placed peritoneal dialysis catheters: a retrospective study. Indian J Nephrol. 2016;26(4):268-274.
[20] DOGRA PM, HOODA AK, SHANMUGRAJ G, et al. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion technique: a comparative study of percutaneous versus surgical insertion. Indian J Nephrol. 2018;28(4):291-297.
[21] KIM YS, KIM Y, SHIN SJ, et al. Current state of dialysis access management in Korea. J Vasc Access. 2019; 20(1-suppl):15-19.
[22] LEE YK, YANG PS, PARK KS, et al. Modified peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: comparison with a conventional method. Yonsei Med J. 2015; 56(4):981-986.
[23] BRIGGS V, PITCHER D, BRADDON F, et al. UK Renal Registry 15th annual report: Chapter 8 UK multisite peritoneal dialysis access catheter audit for first PD catheters 2011. Nephron Clin Pract. 2013;123(Suppl 1):165-181.
[24] GEORGE N, ALEXANDER S, DAVID VG, et al. Comparison of early mechanical and infective complications in first time blind, bedside, midline percutaneous tenckhoff catheter insertion with ultra-short break-in period in diabetics and non-diabetics: setting new standards. Perit Dial Int. 2016;36(6):655-661.
[25] TOKGOZ B. Clinical advantages of peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int. 2009;29 Suppl 2:S59-61.
[26] CRABTREE J, PENNER T, ARMSTRONG S, et al. Peritoneal dialysis university for surgeons: a peritoneal access training program. Peri Dial Int. 2016;36(2):177-181.
[27] ABDEL-AAL AK, GADDIKERI S, SADDEKNI S. Technique of peritoneal catheter placement under fluroscopic guidance. Radiol Res Pract. 2011;2011:141707.
[28] VOSS D, HAWKINS S, POOLE G, et al. Radiological versus surgical implantation of first catheter for peritoneal dialysis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(11):4196-4204.
[29] TULLAVARDHANA T, AKRANURAKKUL P, UNGKITPHAIBOON W, et al. Surgical versus percutaneous techniques for peritoneal dialysis catheter placement: a meta-analysis of the outcomes. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2016;10:11-18.
[30] DE MORAES TP, CAMPOS RP, DE ALCANTARA MT, et al. Similar outcomes of catheters implanted by nephrologists and surgeons: analysis of the Brazilian peritoneal dialysis multicentric study. Semin Dialy. 2012;25(5):565-568.