Cargando…
Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A retrospective cohort study
BACKGROUND: The main limitations of central venous catheters for haemodialysis access are infections and catheter malfunction. Our objective was to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters are comparable to tunnelled central venous catheters in terms of infection and catheter...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6506901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30345873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1129729818805954 |
_version_ | 1783416930134130688 |
---|---|
author | van Oevelen, Mathijs Abrahams, Alferso C Weijmer, Marcel C Nagtegaal, Tjerko Dekker, Friedo W Rotmans, Joris I Meijvis, Sabine CA |
author_facet | van Oevelen, Mathijs Abrahams, Alferso C Weijmer, Marcel C Nagtegaal, Tjerko Dekker, Friedo W Rotmans, Joris I Meijvis, Sabine CA |
author_sort | van Oevelen, Mathijs |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The main limitations of central venous catheters for haemodialysis access are infections and catheter malfunction. Our objective was to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters are comparable to tunnelled central venous catheters in terms of infection and catheter malfunction and to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled catheters are superior to straight catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, observational cohort study, adult patients in whom a central venous catheter for haemodialysis was inserted between 2012 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was a combined endpoint consisting of the first occurrence of either an infection or catheter malfunction. The secondary endpoint was a combined endpoint of the removal of the central venous catheter due to either an infection or a catheter malfunction. Using multivariable analysis, cause-specific hazard ratios for endpoints were calculated for tunnelled catheter versus precurved non-tunnelled catheter, tunnelled catheter versus non-tunnelled catheter, and precurved versus straight non-tunnelled catheter. RESULTS: A total of 1603 patients were included. No difference in reaching the primary endpoint was seen between tunnelled catheters, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.19, p = 0.48). Tunnelled catheters were removed less often, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.46–0.93; p = 0.02). A trend for less infections and catheter malfunctions was seen in precurved jugular non-tunnelled catheters compared to straight non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.24–1.50; p = 0.28) and were removed less often (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.18–0.93; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Tunnelled central venous catheters and precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters showed no difference in reaching the combined endpoint of catheter-related infections and catheter malfunction. Tunnelled catheters get removed less often because of infection/malfunction than precurved non-tunnelled catheters. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6506901 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65069012019-06-03 Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A retrospective cohort study van Oevelen, Mathijs Abrahams, Alferso C Weijmer, Marcel C Nagtegaal, Tjerko Dekker, Friedo W Rotmans, Joris I Meijvis, Sabine CA J Vasc Access Original Research Articles BACKGROUND: The main limitations of central venous catheters for haemodialysis access are infections and catheter malfunction. Our objective was to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters are comparable to tunnelled central venous catheters in terms of infection and catheter malfunction and to assess whether precurved non-tunnelled catheters are superior to straight catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, observational cohort study, adult patients in whom a central venous catheter for haemodialysis was inserted between 2012 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was a combined endpoint consisting of the first occurrence of either an infection or catheter malfunction. The secondary endpoint was a combined endpoint of the removal of the central venous catheter due to either an infection or a catheter malfunction. Using multivariable analysis, cause-specific hazard ratios for endpoints were calculated for tunnelled catheter versus precurved non-tunnelled catheter, tunnelled catheter versus non-tunnelled catheter, and precurved versus straight non-tunnelled catheter. RESULTS: A total of 1603 patients were included. No difference in reaching the primary endpoint was seen between tunnelled catheters, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.19, p = 0.48). Tunnelled catheters were removed less often, compared to precurved non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.46–0.93; p = 0.02). A trend for less infections and catheter malfunctions was seen in precurved jugular non-tunnelled catheters compared to straight non-tunnelled catheters (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.24–1.50; p = 0.28) and were removed less often (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.18–0.93; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Tunnelled central venous catheters and precurved non-tunnelled central venous catheters showed no difference in reaching the combined endpoint of catheter-related infections and catheter malfunction. Tunnelled catheters get removed less often because of infection/malfunction than precurved non-tunnelled catheters. SAGE Publications 2018-10-21 2019-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6506901/ /pubmed/30345873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1129729818805954 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Articles van Oevelen, Mathijs Abrahams, Alferso C Weijmer, Marcel C Nagtegaal, Tjerko Dekker, Friedo W Rotmans, Joris I Meijvis, Sabine CA Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A retrospective cohort study |
title | Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A
retrospective cohort study |
title_full | Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A
retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A
retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A
retrospective cohort study |
title_short | Precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: A
retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | precurved non-tunnelled catheters for haemodialysis are comparable in
terms of infections and malfunction as compared to tunnelled catheters: a
retrospective cohort study |
topic | Original Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6506901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30345873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1129729818805954 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanoevelenmathijs precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT abrahamsalfersoc precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT weijmermarcelc precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT nagtegaaltjerko precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT dekkerfriedow precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT rotmansjorisi precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy AT meijvissabineca precurvednontunnelledcathetersforhaemodialysisarecomparableintermsofinfectionsandmalfunctionascomparedtotunnelledcathetersaretrospectivecohortstudy |