Successful Use of Central Venous Catheter as Permanent Hemodialysis Access: 84-Month Follow-Up in Lucania

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Cuffed tunneled venous access catheters are commonly used for temporary and permanent access in hemodialysis (HD) patients. These catheters serve an essential role in providing permanent access in subjects in whom all other access options have been exhausted. The predominant complications are catheter thrombosis, catheter fibrin sheating and infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term survival and complications of permanent venous catheters (PVC) placed for the purpose of HD during the period from January 1992 to December 1998, at the Dialysis Units of Lucania (a southern Italian region). A total of 98 PVC were placed in 88 patients during this period. The catheters used were of three types: (a) 72 VasCath Soft Cell catheters (Bard Instrument Company, Toronto, Ont., Canada); (b) 22 PermCath catheters (Quinton Instrument Company, Seattle, Wash., USA), and (c) 4 Tesio catheters (Bellco SpA, Mirandola, Italy). Survival curves of catheters were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimator. The patient survival was 60% at the 78th month. Actually, 52 patients (27 males, 25 females) are still alive: 15 (26.9%) of these patients have diabetes mellitus and 1 has been transplanted. The actuarial survival rate of PVC was 89% in the whole population studied and 82% in subjects alive after 84 months. Twenty-five patients (28.4%) had PVC as the first reliable vascular access. Long-term complications occurred 27 times (1 episode every 44.81 month/patient) as: breakage (3.1%); thrombosis (10.2%); displacement (2.0%); subcutaneous tunnel bleeding (3.1%); inadequate blood flow (7.1%), and infection (10.2%). In conclusion, our data confirm that PVC might represent an effective long-term blood access route for HD. Again, PVC are getting the access of choice for selected patients (i.e., older subjects with cardiovascular diseases and cancer patients) and are enjoying a dramatic increase in use for subjects who are terrified of repetitive venopuncture.

Related collections

Most cited references 3

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Hemodialysis access failure: a call to action.

R Hakim, J Himmelfarb (1998)

Recent evidence suggests that the cost as well as the morbidity associated with the maintenance of hemodialysis access is increasing rapidly; currently, the cost exceeds 1 billion dollars and access related hospitalization accounts for 25% of all hospital admissions in the U.S.A. This increase in cost and morbidity has been associated with several epidemiological trends that may contribute to access failure. These include late patient referral to nephrologists and surgeons, late planning of vascular access as well as a shift from A-V fistulaes to PTFE grafts and temporary catheters, which have a higher failure rate. The reasons for this shift in the types of access is multifactorial and is not explained by changes in the co-morbidities of patients presenting to dialysis. Surgical preference and training also appear to play an important role in the large regional variation and patency rate of these PTFE grafts. We propose a program for early placement of A-V fistulae, a continuous quality improvement, multidisciplinary program to monitor access outcome, the development of new biomaterials, and a research plan to investigate pharmacological intervention to reduce development of stenosis and clinical interventions to treat those that do develop, prior to thrombosis.

0 comments Cited 24 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Treatment of infected tunneled venous access hemodialysis catheters with guidewire exchange.

Markus Schwab, D. Robinson, P Suhocki (1998)

Cuffed venous access catheters have become commonplace for hemodialysis access. The major complications of these catheters are catheter thrombosis, catheter fibrin sheathing and infection. When catheter associated bacteremia occurs treatment with antimicrobial therapy alone has been unsuccessful in providing acceptable cure rates. Failed antimicrobial therapy exposes the patient to the risks of prolonged bacteremia, while the alternative, catheter replacement at a new site can lead to central venous stenosis and compromise future long-term upper extremity access. Catheter guidewire exchange when the tunnel tract is clinically not infected theoretically allows the preservation of future access sites and yields a higher treatment success rate while avoiding temporary non-cuffed access placement. We report a series of 23 cases of hemodialysis patients with tunneled cuffed catheters and bacteremia related to the catheter who were treated with the exchange of a new catheter over a guidewire combined with three weeks of systemic antibiotics. Patients eligible for the study required no evidence of tunnel tract infection and defervescence within 48 hours of antimicrobial therapy. Technique failure was defined as repeat infection from any organism within 90 days of catheter exchange. Four patients (18%) redeveloped bacteremia within 90 days of the exchange. The bacteremias developed at 4, 19, 63 and at 74 days days after the exchange. Guidewire exchange in combination with intravenous antibiotics in cases of catheter related bacteremia has an acceptable rate of treatment success and is a viable treatment option in a carefully selected patient population.

0 comments Cited 8 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Initial results of a new access device for hemodialysis: Technical Note

Alan J. Dubrow, Nicolae Caraiani, Todd S. Ing … (1998)

0 comments Cited 2 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (publisher-id): BPU

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Blood Purif

Journal ID (doi): 10.1159/issn.0253-5068

Title: Blood Purification

Publisher: S. Karger AG

ISSN (Print): 0253-5068

ISSN (Electronic): 1421-9735

Publication date Subscription-year: 2001

Publication date (Print): 2001

Publication date (Electronic): 08 December 2000

Volume: 19

Issue: 1

Pages: 39-43

Affiliations

^aDialysis Unit, Lauria Hospital, Lauria; ^bDialysis Unit, Matera Hospital, Matera; ^cDialysis Unit, Potenza Hospital, Potenza; ^dSM2 Dialysis Center, Potenza; ^eDialysis Unit, Rionero in Vulture Hospital, Rionero in Vulture (PZ); ^fDialysis Unit, Tinchi Hospital, Tinchi (MT), and ^gDialysis Unit, Villa d’Agri Hospital, Villa d’Agri (PZ), Italy

Article

Publisher ID: 14477 Other ID: Blood Purif 2001;19:39–43

DOI: 10.1159/000014477

PubMed ID: 11114576

SO-VID: fc71c4a0-a433-44ec-9ac5-282e406cdf3e

License:

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.