RESUMO
Background@#Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) is applied to patients who need PD within two weeks but are able to wait for more than 48 hours before starting PD. To evaluate the usefulness of percutaneous PD catheter insertion in urgent-start PD, we reviewed the clinical outcomes of percutaneous catheter insertion with immediate start PD and surgical insertion with longer break-in time in Pusan National University Hospital. @*Methods@#This study included 177 patients who underwent urgent-start PD. Based on the PD catheter insertion techniques, the patients with urgent-start PD were divided into percutaneous (n = 103) and surgical (n = 74) groups. For the percutaneous group, a modified Seldinger percutaneous catheter insertion with immediate initiation of continuous ambulatory PD was performed by nephrologists. @*Results@#The percutaneous group showed higher serum urea nitrogen, creatinine, and lower serum albumin compared with the surgical group (P < 0.05). Ninety-day infectious and mechanical complications showed no significant differences between the two groups. Ninety-day peritonitis in the percutaneous group was 9.7% compared to 5.4% in the surgical group (P = not significant [NS]). Major leakage was 3.9% in the percutaneous group compared to 1.4% in the surgical group (P = NS). Overall infectious and mechanical complication-free survival was not significantly different between the two groups. The percutaneous group and surgical group showed no statistical difference with respect to catheter survival over the entire observation period (P = NS). @*Conclusion@#This study suggests that urgent-start PD can be applied safely with percutaneous catheter insertion by nephrologists with no break-in period.
RESUMO
A 22-year-old woman with a 1-month history of shortness of breath that was treated as a case of tuberculosis and pulmonary embolism was referred to the authors’ hospital. Because of the hemodynamic instability in this patient, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was administered in the intensive care unit. She underwent a pulmonary embolectomy for the treatment of progressive circulatory collapse secondary to a pulmonary embolism. The histopathologic result was consistent with a metastatic choriocarcinoma. Despite the surgical management, persistent refractory cardiogenic shock occurred. Subsequently, the patient was treated with chemotherapy in the presence of ECMO and responded well to chemotherapy. She was discharged after 3 months. This case suggests that metastatic choriocarcinoma should be considered as a differential diagnosis in women of childbearing age presenting with a pulmonary embolism, and ECMO may be beneficial in patients with pulmonary embolism for bridging to surgical embolectomy and chemotherapy.