Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on April 16, 2007
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2007 22(7):2045-2051; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfm150
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
22/7/2045    most recent
gfm150v1
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 Aksu, N.
Right arrow Articles by Bal, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Aksu, N.
Right arrow Articles by Bal, A.
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

A ten-year single-centre experience in children on chronic peritoneal dialysis—significance of percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters

Nejat Aksu, Onder Yavascan, Murat Anil, Orhan Deniz Kara, Hakan Erdogan and Alkan Bal

Department of Pediatrics, Tepecik Teaching and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Dr Nejat Aksu, Çaglar Cad. Cumhuriyet Sitesi No:74/3 Emlak Konutlari, 35410 Gaziemir, Izmir, Turkey. Email: muratanil1969{at}hotmail.com



  Abstract

Background. Chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) in children is an important modality of renal replacement therapy. The ideal method for inserting CPD catheters remains still controversial. Minimal invasive techniques are becoming more popular. This study was performed in order to evaluate the efficiency, the complication profile and the survey of percutaneously placed CPD catheters in children, retrospectively.

Methods. This study was carried out on 108 peritoneal catheters implanted in 93 patients (45 girls, 48 boys), aged 8.0 ± 4.2 years (range: 3 months to 16 years) during the period between December 1995 and November 2005. In the study group, 32 children were transplanted, 15 were transferred to haemodialysis and 18 patients died. All catheters implanted by percutaneous route were Tenckhoff swan-neck double-cuff paediatric catheters. Placement procedure was performed in our unit by us. Statistical analysis was made by chi-square and Kaplan–Meier methods.

Results. During 2670 CPD months we observed a total of 108 catheter-related complications: 82 catheter infections including exit-site and/or tunnel infection (1/32.5 patient-months), 10 dislocations, six drainage problems and six kinks. The incidence of all complications was one complication every 24.72 dialysis months. Overall, the incidence of peritonitis was one episode per 18.1 patient-months. Pseudomonas spp. and Staphylococcus aureus were the two most common causes of infections. Fifteen catheters were removed due to catheter-related causes: drainage problems (six patients), catheter dislocation (three patients), omental capture (two patients) kink (two patients) and tunnel infection (two patients). The catheter survival rate was 92.4% at 1 year, 83% at 2 years and 63% at 10 years; patient survival in the 93 children was 91% at 1 year, 84% at 2 years and 48% at 10 years. Younger patients were at increased risk of exit-site and tunnel infections (P < 0.05) but the difference in catheter survival time between the age groups was not significant (P > 0.05). In complications, no statistical difference was observed between early and delayed catheter use groups (P > 0.05). We compared the two periods (period 1, December 1995 to November 2000; period 2, December 2000 to November 2005), for complications of CPD. The risk of catheter migration was greater in period 1 than in period 2 (P = 0.04).

Conclusions. The percutaneous technique performed by experienced nephrologists is a reliable, safe and cost-effective method for placement of PD catheters. In our opinion, the skill for CPD catheter placement must be part of the paediatric nephrologist training.

Keywords: catheter; catheter-related complications; children; chronic peritoneal dialysis; percutaneous placement; peritonitis

Received for publication: 5.10.06
Accepted in revised form: 27. 2.07


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
pdiHome page
J. H. Crabtree
THE USE OF THE LAPAROSCOPE FOR DIALYSIS CATHETER IMPLANTATION: VALUABLE CARRY-ON OR EXCESS BAGGAGE?
Perit. Dial. Int., July 1, 2009; 29(4): 394 - 406.
[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.