Lee James, Mott Nigel, Mahmood Usman, Clouston John, Summers Kara, Nicholas Pauline, Gois Pedro Henrique França, Ranganathan Dwarakanathan
Redcliffe Hospital, Redcliffe, Queensland, Australia.
Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018 Apr;62(2):174-178. doi: 10.1111/1754-9485.12643. Epub 2017 Aug 1.
Radiological insertion of Tenckhoff catheters can be an alternative option for peritoneal dialysis access creation, as compared to surgical catheter insertion. This study will review the outcomes and complications of radiological Tenckhoff catheter insertion in a metropolitan renal service and compare costs between surgical and radiological insertion.
Data were collected prospectively for all patients who had a Tenckhoff catheter insertion for peritoneal dialysis (PD) under radiological guidance at our hospital from May 2014 to November 2016. The type of catheter used and complications, including peri-catheter leak, exit site infection and peritonitis were reviewed. Follow-up data were also collected at points 3, 6 and 12 months from catheter insertion. Costing data were obtained from Queensland Health Electronic Reporting System (QHERS) data, average staff salaries and consumable contract price lists.
In the 30-month evaluation period, 70 catheters were inserted. Two patients had an unsuccessful procedure due to the presence of abdominal adhesions. Seven patients had an episode of peri-catheter leak, and four patients had an exit site infection following catheter insertion. Peritonitis was observed in nine patients during the study period. The majority of patients (90%) remained on peritoneal dialysis at 3-month follow-up. The average costs of surgical and radiological insertion were noted to be AUD$7788.34 and AUD$1597.35, respectively.
Radiological Tenckhoff catheter insertion for peritoneal dialysis appears to be an attractive and cost-effective option given less waiting periods for the procedure, the relatively low cost of insertion and comparable rates of complications.
与手术置入导管相比,经放射学方法置入Tenckhoff导管可作为建立腹膜透析通路的一种替代选择。本研究将回顾在一家大城市肾脏服务机构中经放射学方法置入Tenckhoff导管的结果及并发症,并比较手术置入和放射学置入的成本。
前瞻性收集2014年5月至2016年11月在我院接受放射学引导下Tenckhoff导管置入用于腹膜透析(PD)的所有患者的数据。回顾所使用导管的类型及并发症,包括导管周围渗漏、出口处感染和腹膜炎。还在导管置入后3、6和12个月收集随访数据。成本数据来自昆士兰卫生电子报告系统(QHERS)数据、平均员工工资和耗材合同价格清单。
在30个月的评估期内,共置入70根导管。2例患者因存在腹部粘连手术未成功。7例患者发生导管周围渗漏,4例患者在导管置入后出现出口处感染。研究期间9例患者发生腹膜炎。在3个月随访时,大多数患者(90%)仍在进行腹膜透析。手术置入和放射学置入的平均成本分别为7788.34澳元和1597.35澳元。
考虑到手术等待时间较短、置入成本相对较低且并发症发生率相当,经放射学方法置入Tenckhoff导管用于腹膜透析似乎是一种有吸引力且具有成本效益的选择。