Maya Ivan D, Allon Michael
Division of Nephrology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA.
Kidney Int. 2005 Dec;68(6):2886-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00762.x.
Tunneled femoral vein dialysis catheters are used as a last resort when all other options for a permanent vascular access or thoracic central vein catheter have been exhausted. There is little published literature on the complications or outcomes of tunneled femoral catheters.
Using a prospective, computerized vascular access database, we identified all tunneled femoral dialysis catheters placed at the University of Alabama at Birmingham during a five-year period. The clinical features, catheter patency, and complications in these patients were compared to those observed in a group of sex-, age-, and date-matched control patients with tunneled internal jugular vein dialysis catheters.
During the study period, 27 patients received a tunneled femoral dialysis catheter, accounting for 1.9% of all tunneled catheters placed. Only 7 patients (26%) were able to convert to a new permanent dialysis access. The primary catheter patency (time from placement to exchange) was substantially shorter for femoral catheters than for internal jugular dialysis catheters (median survival, 59 vs. >300 days, P < 0.0001). Infection-free survival was similar for both groups (P= 0.66). Seven patients with femoral catheters (or 26%) developed an ipsilateral deep vein thrombosis, but catheter use was possible with anticoagulation.
Tunneled femoral dialysis catheters have a substantially shorter primary patency, but a similar risk of catheter-related bacteremia, as compared with internal jugular vein catheters. An ipsilateral lower extremity deep vein thrombosis occurs commonly after placement of a femoral dialysis catheter, but does not preclude continued catheter use.
当所有其他建立永久性血管通路或使用胸段中心静脉导管的选择都已用尽时,隧道式股静脉透析导管被用作最后的手段。关于隧道式股静脉导管的并发症或结局的已发表文献很少。
利用一个前瞻性的计算机化血管通路数据库,我们确定了在五年期间于阿拉巴马大学伯明翰分校放置的所有隧道式股静脉透析导管。将这些患者的临床特征、导管通畅情况和并发症与一组性别、年龄和日期匹配的使用隧道式颈内静脉透析导管的对照患者所观察到的情况进行比较。
在研究期间,27例患者接受了隧道式股静脉透析导管,占所有放置的隧道式导管的1.9%。只有7例患者(26%)能够转换为新的永久性透析通路。股静脉导管的初次导管通畅时间(从放置到更换的时间)明显短于颈内静脉透析导管(中位生存期,59天对>300天,P<0.0001)。两组的无感染生存期相似(P=0.66)。7例使用股静脉导管的患者(或26%)发生了同侧深静脉血栓形成,但抗凝治疗后仍可继续使用导管。
与颈内静脉导管相比,隧道式股静脉透析导管的初次通畅时间明显较短,但导管相关菌血症的风险相似。股静脉透析导管放置后同侧下肢深静脉血栓形成常见,但并不妨碍继续使用导管。