A technique to address peritoneal dialysis catheter malfunction.

BACKGROUND: A 66-year-old male with a history of severe ischemic myopathy and renal failure underwent a combined heart and kidney transplant. Postoperative failure of the transplanted kidney eventually led to the need for peritoneal dialysis (PD). METHODS: After one month, the PD catheter was laparoscopically repositioned after it was found to have migrated from its correct position in the pelvis and twisted and clogged in the omentum. After one more month, the same complication recurred. Laparoscopy was again used to clear the clogged catheter and reposition it. This time, a testicular prosthesis was sewn to the catheter and used as an anchoring weight for the proper position in the pelvis. RESULTS: Six months after anchoring with the testicular prosthesis, the peritoneal dialysis catheter continues to function appropriately, and the patient has no complaints. CONCLUSIONS: Mal-positioned peritoneal dialysis catheters may be repositioned and anchored by using a testicular prosthesis in the event that weighted catheters are not available.

A multi-site validation trial of radioactive seed localization as an alternative to wire localization.

This study aims to validate radioactive seed localization (RSL) as an alternative to wire localization (WL) in the operative excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. Eligible patients were recruited sequentially. A sample of 99 patients treated with WL was compared to the next 383 patients treated with RSL. Margins were considered "negative" if > or =2 mm from in-situ and invasive disease. Pain and convenience scores were recorded on a 10-point scale. Patient characteristics and histology were similar. The lesion and localization device were retrieved in all patients. Margins of the first specimen were negative in 73% of RSL patients, versus 54% of WL patients (p < 0.001). A second operation was required in 8% of RSL patients to achieve negative margins, versus 25% of WL patients (p < 0.001). Pain scores were not statistically different. However, the RSL group had higher convenience scores (p = 0.015). RSL is safe, effective, and compared to WL, reduces the rates of intraoperative re-excision and reoperation for positive margins by 68%. Patient satisfaction is improved with RSL. We strongly favor RSL over WL.