Xie J Y, Chen N, Ren H, Huang X M, Zhu P
Department of Nephrology, Shanghai Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, School of Medicine, Shanghai, P.R. China.
Clin Nephrol. 2009 Nov;72(5):373-9. doi: 10.5414/cnp72373.
To compare the difference of clinical curative effects of continuous ambulant peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients in China by using a two-cuff Swan neck catheter and a Tenckhoff catheter.
110 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were enrolled. They were divided into Group A (Swan neck catheter group, n = 55) and Group B (Tenckhoff catheter group, n = 55). One-year follow-up visits were made and information was recorded. Survival analysis was made by adopting the Kaplan-Meier method.
After 12 month follow-up visits, 17 patients had died, 3 had been transferred to renal transplantation, 8 had been transferred to hemodialysis, 3 were transferred to other hospitals, and the remaining 79 patients (71.8%) continued their peritoneal dialysis therapy in our hospital. 26 patients in both groups had peritonitis, with a total of 35 occurrences taking place. The total incidence of peritonitis was 0.32 times/patient year, with the detailed figure of 0.35 times/patient year for Group A and 0.29 times/patient year for Group B respectively (p > 0.05). Regarding mechanical complications of the 2 groups concerned, including catheter tip migration, Omental enwrapment, peritoneal dialysate leakage, skid of outer cuff, incidence of inguinal hernia and bellyache, etc, no significant difference existed between two groups (p > 0.05). The two groups had the same 12-month technical survival rate of 92.73%. The 12-month survival rate for Group A was 86.34% while the corresponding figure for Group B was 80.68% (p > 0.05).
Infections, mechanical complications, technical survival rate and patients' survival rate were quite similar, when a Swan neck catheter and a Tenckhoff catheter were used in Chinese CAPD patients.
比较中国持续性非卧床腹膜透析（CAPD）患者使用双cuff鹅颈导管和Tenckhoff导管的临床疗效差异。
纳入110例终末期肾病（ESRD）患者。将他们分为A组（鹅颈导管组，n = 55）和B组（Tenckhoff导管组，n = 55）。进行为期一年的随访并记录信息。采用Kaplan-Meier法进行生存分析。
随访12个月后，17例患者死亡，3例转至肾移植，8例转至血液透析，3例转至其他医院，其余79例患者（71.8%）在我院继续腹膜透析治疗。两组各有26例患者发生腹膜炎，共发生35例次。腹膜炎总发生率为0.32次/患者年，其中A组为0.35次/患者年，B组为0.29次/患者年（p>0.05）。关于两组的机械并发症，包括导管尖端移位、大网膜包裹、腹膜透析液渗漏、外cuff滑脱、腹股沟疝发生率和腹痛等，两组之间无显著差异（p>0.05）。两组12个月的技术生存率均为92.73%。A组12个月生存率为86.34%，B组相应数字为80.68%（p>0.05）。
中国CAPD患者使用鹅颈导管和Tenckhoff导管时，感染、机械并发症、技术生存率和患者生存率相当相似。
