Comparative study between the halfway technique and the standard technique for exchange of tunneled hemodialysis catheter.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Vascular Access Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-06 DOI:10.1177/11297298241286203
Adel Kamhawy, AbdelRahman A Nagy, Emad M Sallam
{"title":"Comparative study between the halfway technique and the standard technique for exchange of tunneled hemodialysis catheter.","authors":"Adel Kamhawy, AbdelRahman A Nagy, Emad M Sallam","doi":"10.1177/11297298241286203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>When indicated, tunneled hemodialysis catheters are usually inserted using the standard technique but, this technique has its complications. The halfway method is performed by exchange of an already-inserted dialysis catheter (tunneled or non-tunneled) to a tunneled one over a guidewire mounted via the old catheter. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the feasibility, safety, and durability of halfway method in comparison to the standard technique (de novo puncture).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This prospective study was conducted during the period from May 2020 till May 2022 and included 87 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on regular hemodialysis (HD) in need for insertion new tunneled dialysis catheters instead of temporary or malfunctioning tunneled ones. According to the technique of catheter insertion, these patients were divided into two groups: group A (the halfway technique: catheters were exchanged over guidewires under fluoroscopic control; 48 patients) and group B (the standard technique: via de novo ultrasound-guided vein puncture; 39 patients). Instant, delayed complications and 12-months patency rates were reported and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The frequency of peri-operative bleeding complications was better in the halfway group with comparable infection rate and late catheter dysfunction results between the two groups. One year patency rates were 87.5% in halfway technique group compared to 79.5% in standard technique group, yet without statistical significance. However, there was a statistically significant shorter operative time in halfway group (15.54 ± 2.6 min vs 26.97 ± 5.6 min, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The halfway technique may be recommended over the standard technique of tunneled catheter insertion due to shorter operative time, lower rate of hematoma formation, with non-inferior 1-year patency rates and comparable technical success and infection rates. The advantage of access sites preservation for future demand makes this technique of great value to this group of ESRD patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":56113,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Access","volume":" ","pages":"1539-1546"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Access","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298241286203","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: When indicated, tunneled hemodialysis catheters are usually inserted using the standard technique but, this technique has its complications. The halfway method is performed by exchange of an already-inserted dialysis catheter (tunneled or non-tunneled) to a tunneled one over a guidewire mounted via the old catheter. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the feasibility, safety, and durability of halfway method in comparison to the standard technique (de novo puncture).

Patients and methods: This prospective study was conducted during the period from May 2020 till May 2022 and included 87 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on regular hemodialysis (HD) in need for insertion new tunneled dialysis catheters instead of temporary or malfunctioning tunneled ones. According to the technique of catheter insertion, these patients were divided into two groups: group A (the halfway technique: catheters were exchanged over guidewires under fluoroscopic control; 48 patients) and group B (the standard technique: via de novo ultrasound-guided vein puncture; 39 patients). Instant, delayed complications and 12-months patency rates were reported and analyzed.

Results: The frequency of peri-operative bleeding complications was better in the halfway group with comparable infection rate and late catheter dysfunction results between the two groups. One year patency rates were 87.5% in halfway technique group compared to 79.5% in standard technique group, yet without statistical significance. However, there was a statistically significant shorter operative time in halfway group (15.54 ± 2.6 min vs 26.97 ± 5.6 min, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The halfway technique may be recommended over the standard technique of tunneled catheter insertion due to shorter operative time, lower rate of hematoma formation, with non-inferior 1-year patency rates and comparable technical success and infection rates. The advantage of access sites preservation for future demand makes this technique of great value to this group of ESRD patients.

交换隧道式血液透析导管的半途技术与标准技术的比较研究。
目的:有必要时,通常采用标准技术插入隧道式血液透析导管,但这种技术有其并发症。中途插入法是将已插入的透析导管(隧道式或非隧道式)与经由旧导管安装的导丝上的隧道式导管进行交换。在这项研究中,我们的目的是评估半路方法与标准技术(重新穿刺)相比的可行性、安全性和耐用性:这项前瞻性研究在 2020 年 5 月至 2022 年 5 月期间进行,纳入了 87 名定期接受血液透析(HD)的终末期肾病(ESRD)患者,这些患者需要插入新的隧道式透析导管,以取代临时或失灵的隧道式导管。根据导管插入技术,这些患者被分为两组:A 组(半途插入技术:在透视控制下通过导丝更换导管;48 名患者)和 B 组(标准技术:通过超声引导下的静脉穿刺重新插入导管;39 名患者)。报告和分析了即时、延迟并发症和 12 个月的通畅率:结果:半路组围术期出血并发症发生率较高,两组感染率和后期导管功能障碍结果相当。半路技术组的一年通畅率为 87.5%,标准技术组为 79.5%,但无统计学意义。不过,半路技术组的手术时间明显更短(15.54±2.6 分钟 vs 26.97±5.6 分钟,P 结论):与隧道式导管插入的标准技术相比,半路插入技术手术时间更短、血肿形成率更低、1 年通畅率不低于标准技术、技术成功率和感染率相当,因此可推荐使用半路插入技术。保留通路部位以备将来之需的优势使该技术对这类 ESRD 患者具有重要价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Vascular Access
Journal of Vascular Access 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
31.60%
发文量
181
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vascular Access (JVA) is issued six times per year; it considers the publication of original manuscripts dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of vascular access. In addition reviews, case reports and clinical trials are welcome, as well as papers dedicated to more practical aspects covering new devices and techniques. All contributions, coming from all over the world, undergo the peer-review process. The Journal of Vascular Access is divided into independent sections, each led by Editors of the highest scientific level: • Dialysis • Oncology • Interventional radiology • Nutrition • Nursing • Intensive care Correspondence related to published papers is also welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信