Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
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 (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Quiroga, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Darby, C. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Quiroga, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Darby, C. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2001) 16: 2079-2081
© 2001 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

Technical Notes

Tenckhoff catheters post-renal transplantation: the ‘pull’ technique?

Isabel M. Quiroga, Ram Baboo, Rozanne H. Lord and Christopher R. Darby

University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, UK

Abstract

Background. Tenckhoff catheters are used widely for the provision of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Traditionally these catheters are removed surgically under anaesthesia. We set out to introduce and monitor prospectively a technique for removal of the Tenckhoff catheter by a ‘pull’ technique. The intention was to avoid the discomfort, risk and cost of traditional surgery.

Methods. Over a 1-year period all renal transplant patients having their Tenckhoff catheter removed by this technique were monitored prospectively. All patients were followed for a minimum 2-year period after removal. In the pull technique steady non-jerky traction is applied to the catheter. Complications such as catheter breakage and cuff related sepsis were recorded.

Results. Sepsis related to a retained cuff occurred in only one patient early in the series. There were no other complications. The procedure was well tolerated. Use of local anaesthesia used initially, was largely phased out over the course of study and the procedure moved from the theatre to the ward.

Conclusions. The pull technique is safe and well tolerated. The technique has significant advantages in selected patients without a history of recent peritonitis or exit site infection, in reducing risk to the patients, the pain of abdominal wall surgery and reduced usage of costly theatre time and in-patient beds.

Keywords: anaesthesia; complications; cost; pull technique; removal; surgery; Tenckhoff; transplantation

Notes

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Dr Isabel Quiroga, Transplant Centre, Churchill Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LJ, UK. Email: isabelquiroga{at}hotmail.com


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
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
I. Quiroga, S. P. Reddy, S. Bhattacharjya, and C. R. Darby
Tenckhoff catheters: the pull technique
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2003; 18(8): 1682 - 1682.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
I. Quiroga, S. P. Reddy, S. Bhattacharjya, and C. R. Darby
Tenckhoff catheters: the pull technique
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2003; 18(88): 1682 - 1682.
[Full Text]


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.