ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Ethanol lock (EL) is used to reduce catheter infections, but its impact on dialysis catheter dysfunction has not been studied. METHODS: We analyzed the rate of dialysis silicone catheter dysfunction after an interdialytic 60% EL in an open prospective controlled non crossover cohort study, with each patient being his or her own control. The study was divided into three consecutive 2-week periods: the pre- and post-intervention periods, in which interdialytic standard locks (SL) were used, and the intervention period, in which one EL was instilled during the first week, and two consecutively in the second week. We analyzed the rate of catheter dysfunction (exchange, use of fibrinolytic, reversing the lines, difficulty in instilling or withdrawing fluid) after EL or SL. RESULTS: In 30 patients, 90 EL were instilled. The rate of catheter dysfunction increased during the EL period (2 - 13%, p < 0.001), and between the two consecutive dialysis sessions before and after EL (p < 0.05). It decreased between the two consecutive dialysis sessions after EL and the following dialysis session after an SL (p < 0.05). No catheter was removed. The urea reduction ratio did not differ in dialysis after an SL and after an EL (0.77 vs. 0.73, p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: Short term EL is associated with a transient increase in catheter dysfunction, without resulting in catheter removal or decreasing dialysis efficiency.
Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local/adverse effects , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/chemistry , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheters, Indwelling/adverse effects , Ethanol/adverse effects , Ethanol/chemistry , Prosthesis Failure , Renal Dialysis/instrumentation , Aged , Chi-Square Distribution , Equipment Contamination , Female , Humans , Male , Materials Testing , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis-Related Infections/prevention & control , SiliconesABSTRACT
Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis catheter could be placed also by open laparotomy as well as by laparoscopic techniques. We did a retrospective study on cases to compare the results of laparoscopies. There were included 42 patients which we divided in two groups of 21. Group A underwent 21 cases in which catheters was inserted by open laparotomy. Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis was started in 24 to 48 hours later. Group B incharged 21 patients underwent laparoscopic placement of the catheter between 2000 and 2001. Continuous peritoneal dialysis was started early (after 6 hours). The mean operative time was 28 minutes in group A and 30 minutes in group B. Fluid leakage was noticed in 4 patients in group A and in 3 patients in group B. Peritoneal reactions occurred in 5 patients in group A and in 2 patients in group B. Tip migration occurred in 5 patients in group A (one of which was mobilized accidentaly early after intervention) in which was necessary 4 open reinterventions, and no patients in group B. In group B one patient underwent a simultaneous liver biopsy for cirosis and another female patient underwent ovariectomy for a giant ovary cyst. Laparoscopic placement of dialysis catheter leads to better function than does open procedure, it allows immediate start of dialysis and permits simultaneous performance of other laparoscopic procedures.
