Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
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 (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Elkabir, J.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Elkabir, J.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol 14, Issue 6 1550-1552, Copyright © 1999 by Oxford University Press

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Delayed complications following Tenckhoff catheter removal

J Elkabir, A Riaz, S Agarwal and G Williams
Department of Urology, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK; Corresponding author

Background: Tenckhoff catheter placement is well established to facilitate continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in the treatment of end-stage renal failure. Complications of these catheters while in situ are well documented. However little information is available concerning post-removal complications. Many centres, including our own remove these catheters by traction resulting in retained cuffs, rather than by formal dissection. We have evaluated the outcome of such removal over a 2-year period. Methods: Sixty-two patients underwent Tenckhoff catheter removal by traction over a 2-year period at our unit. Patients were evaluated retrospectively using case notes and operation records. Results: The catheters were sited for a mean of 23 months and were most commonly removed because of persistent peritonitis (47.4%). Sixty-one per cent of all patients had experienced at least one episode of CAPD peritonitis while the catheter was in situ, but this did not correlate with those who developed local sepsis. Fifteen patients (24.2%) subsequently developed local infective complications after a mean of 5.7 months (range 1-17 months). The subcutaneous cuff was involved in all cases and the peritoneal cuff was involved in six cases. Thirty patients were identified as being immunosuppressed, but this was not a risk factor in the development of retained cuff infections. Conclusions: There is a significant risk of local sepsis with retained cuffs resulting from removal by traction and our data suggests that these catheters should be removed by dissection and excision of both cuffs. Key words: catheter; complications; dialysis; surgery; tenckhoff
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
A M Barnacle and A W M Mitchell
Technical report: use of ultrasound guidance in the removal of tunnelled venous access catheter cuffs
Br. J. Radiol., February 1, 2005; 78(926): 147 - 149.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
I. M. Quiroga, R. Baboo, R. H. Lord, and C. R. Darby
Tenckhoff catheters post-renal transplantation: the 'pull' technique?
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., October 1, 2001; 16(10): 2079 - 2081.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.