Michał Zawistowski, Piotr Niecikowski, Magdalena Durlik, Joanna Nowaczyk, Jan Broda, Bartosz Foroncewicz, Krzysztof Mucha, Monika Widera, Robert Król, Honorata Stadnik, Marek Karczewski, Tomasz Kruszyna, Bogdan Niekowal, Justyna Korus, Dorota Kamińska, Magdalena Krajewska, Maciej Kosieradzki, Piotr Domagała
{"title":"Peritoneal dialysis catheter removal at the time or after kidney transplantation: A multicenter cardinality-matched cohort study.","authors":"Michał Zawistowski, Piotr Niecikowski, Magdalena Durlik, Joanna Nowaczyk, Jan Broda, Bartosz Foroncewicz, Krzysztof Mucha, Monika Widera, Robert Król, Honorata Stadnik, Marek Karczewski, Tomasz Kruszyna, Bogdan Niekowal, Justyna Korus, Dorota Kamińska, Magdalena Krajewska, Maciej Kosieradzki, Piotr Domagała","doi":"10.17219/acem/200075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence regarding the optimal timing of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) removal in renal graft recipients is limited. While some centers opt for removal during the transplant procedure, others defer catheter removal to various time points post-transplantation.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this multicenter cardinality-matched cohort study, we aimed to determine the optimal timing of PDC removal in patients undergoing kidney transplantation.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Data from 324 patients were collected across 5 centers. We compared patients who had catheters removed during renal transplant (the PDC-free group) with those who had them removed after the procedure (the PDC group), matched 1:2 by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), living, and extended criteria donor statuses. We evaluated: 1) the need for dialysis within 2 post-transplant months, 2) a composite endpoint of catheter-related infection, peritonitis and/or surgical site infection, and 3) the length of hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After cardinality matching, the groups were well-balanced across all matching covariates. Postoperative dialysis was required in 14% of patients, with no statistically significant difference observed between the PDC-free and PDC groups (19% vs 12%; odds ratio (OR) = 1.94; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.78-4.81; p = 0.152). Of the 14 patients in the PDC group who required dialysis postoperatively, only 3 were managed with peritoneal dialysis. No statistically significant difference was noted for the composite endpoint (8.6% vs 6.2%; OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.20-2.77; p = 0.656). Hospitalization was significantly longer in patients from the PDC group (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 11 [9-15] vs 9 [7-12]; BM = -3.036; p = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study did not demonstrate any benefits associated with delaying PDC removal in renal graft recipients. On the contrary, postponing removal was linked to prolonged hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":7306,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17219/acem/200075","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Evidence regarding the optimal timing of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) removal in renal graft recipients is limited. While some centers opt for removal during the transplant procedure, others defer catheter removal to various time points post-transplantation.
Objectives: In this multicenter cardinality-matched cohort study, we aimed to determine the optimal timing of PDC removal in patients undergoing kidney transplantation.
Material and methods: Data from 324 patients were collected across 5 centers. We compared patients who had catheters removed during renal transplant (the PDC-free group) with those who had them removed after the procedure (the PDC group), matched 1:2 by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), living, and extended criteria donor statuses. We evaluated: 1) the need for dialysis within 2 post-transplant months, 2) a composite endpoint of catheter-related infection, peritonitis and/or surgical site infection, and 3) the length of hospitalization.
Results: After cardinality matching, the groups were well-balanced across all matching covariates. Postoperative dialysis was required in 14% of patients, with no statistically significant difference observed between the PDC-free and PDC groups (19% vs 12%; odds ratio (OR) = 1.94; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.78-4.81; p = 0.152). Of the 14 patients in the PDC group who required dialysis postoperatively, only 3 were managed with peritoneal dialysis. No statistically significant difference was noted for the composite endpoint (8.6% vs 6.2%; OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.20-2.77; p = 0.656). Hospitalization was significantly longer in patients from the PDC group (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 11 [9-15] vs 9 [7-12]; BM = -3.036; p = 0.003).
Conclusions: This study did not demonstrate any benefits associated with delaying PDC removal in renal graft recipients. On the contrary, postponing removal was linked to prolonged hospitalization.
期刊介绍：
Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine has been published by the Wroclaw Medical University since 1992. Establishing the medical journal was the idea of Prof. Bogumił Halawa, Chair of the Department of Cardiology, and was fully supported by the Rector of Wroclaw Medical University, Prof. Zbigniew Knapik. Prof. Halawa was also the first editor-in-chief, between 1992-1997. The journal, then entitled "Postępy Medycyny Klinicznej i Doświadczalnej", appeared quarterly.
Prof. Leszek Paradowski was editor-in-chief from 1997-1999. In 1998 he initiated alterations in the profile and cover design of the journal which were accepted by the Editorial Board. The title was changed to Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Articles in English were welcomed. A number of outstanding representatives of medical science from Poland and abroad were invited to participate in the newly established International Editorial Staff.
Prof. Antonina Harłozińska-Szmyrka was editor-in-chief in years 2000-2005, in years 2006-2007 once again prof. Leszek Paradowski and prof. Maria Podolak-Dawidziak was editor-in-chief in years 2008-2016. Since 2017 the editor-in chief is prof. Maciej Bagłaj.
Since July 2005, original papers have been published only in English. Case reports are no longer accepted. The manuscripts are reviewed by two independent reviewers and a statistical reviewer, and English texts are proofread by a native speaker.
The journal has been indexed in several databases: Scopus, Ulrich’sTM International Periodicals Directory, Index Copernicus and since 2007 in Thomson Reuters databases: Science Citation Index Expanded i Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition.
In 2010 the journal obtained Impact Factor which is now 1.179 pts. Articles published in the journal are worth 15 points among Polish journals according to the Polish Committee for Scientific Research and 169.43 points according to the Index Copernicus.
Since November 7, 2012, Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine has been indexed and included in National Library of Medicine’s MEDLINE database. English abstracts printed in the journal are included and searchable using PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
