Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on September 21, 2007
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2008 23(1):275-281; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfm582
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/1/275    most recent
gfm582v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fry, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Warwicker, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fry, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Warwicker, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2007]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org


Factors affecting long-term survival of tunnelled haemodialysis catheters—a prospective audit of 812 tunnelled catheters

Andrew C. Fry1, Jon Stratton2, Ken Farrington1, Kapil Mahna1, Sadasivam Selvakumar3, Hilary Thompson3 and Paul Warwicker1

1Lister Renal Unit, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, 2The Renal Unit, Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust, Truro, Cornwall and 3Department Of Surgery, Lister Hospital, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England

Correspondence to: Dr Paul Warwicker, BSc FRCP MD, Lister Renal Unit, Lister Hospital, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England SG1 4AB. Email: paul.warwicker{at}nhs.net



  Abstract

Background. In 2001, in the US, 23% of haemodialysis patients were dialysing through tunnelled venous catheters (TVCs), and in the UK (2006) there were 28% of prevalent patients using catheters. It is unlikely that numbers will significantly decrease.

We present the results of a prospective audit of the survival of 812 TVCs placed in 492 patients at our institution over a 6-year period (comprising 212 048 patient catheter days or 7068 patient catheter months of follow-up). Four different designs of catheter were studied: Split-Cath III (Medcomp), HemoSplit (Bard), Tesio twin catheter (Medcomp) and Permcath (Quinton).

Methods. We used Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with log-rank test, to compare the effect of different parameters on catheter survival.The relative importance of significant parameters was determined by Cox regression analysis.

Results. We have shown a significant catheter survival advantage of first catheters over second and subsequent insertions, of right internal jugular site over left internal jugular and thereafter over femoral site, and of non-diabetic over diabetic patients. Patient age, sex and operator (physician in ward-based procedure room under ultrasound control or surgeon in operating theatre under fluoroscopic assistance) did not significantly affect survival. The Permcath design demonstrated inferior survival in all but first catheter insertions in catheter-naïve patients. The HemoSplit and Tesio twin catheter designs demonstrated best survival overall.

By Cox proportional hazard modelling the design and the position of the TVC seemed to be the most significant independent survival factors.

Conclusions. Clinicians need accurate data regarding catheter survival, mode of insertion and design, to inform practice.

Keywords: catheters and catheterization; catheter survival; central veins; haemodialysis; tunnelled venous catheter; vascular access

Received for publication: 1. 4.07
Accepted in revised form: 31. 7.07


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.