Research Article

Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses

Volume: 7 Number: 2 May 29, 2021
TR EN

Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses

Abstract

Objective: To determine the patency rates and reasons for failure using different access routes for tunneled hemodialysis catheters. Methods: The records of patients who underwent insertion of 14 French tunnelled hemodialysis catheters were retrospectively analyzed. Catheter patency survival was demonstrated using Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Catheter failure and exchange reasons were evaluated. Results: One hundred and six patients underwent 474 catheter exchanges (mean/patient 4.47±1.62). Access was via right internal jugular vein (IJV) n=40, left IJV n=23, right femoral vein (FV) n=18, left FV n=11 and transhepatic vein n=14. The causes of catheter failure and exchange were: catheter-associated infection, catheter thrombosis, fibrin sheath and catheter tip malposition. Mean primary and cumulative catheter patency time was higher in the right IJV group (732 and 1337 days, respectively) compared with the others (p<0.001). The incidence of catheter-related infections was higher in the left FV (0.42/100 patient-days) and catheter tip malposition was higher in the transhepatic (0.38/100 patient-days) and in the left IJV (0.32/100 patient-days). Conclusion: The use of right IJV should be the first option for hemodialysis access route. Based on our findings, if right IJV is unavailable the optimal access routes in order would be left IJV, right FV, left FV and finally transhepatic vein.

Keywords

References

  1. Vascular Access Work Group. Clinical practice guidelines for vascular access. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;48(suppl1):248-273. Doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2006.04.029.
  2. Saran R, Li Y, Robinson B, et al: US Renal Data System 2015 Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis. 2016;67: 1-305. Doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.12.014
  3. NKF-K/DOQI Clinical Practice Guidelines for Vascular Access: update 2000. Am J Kidney Dis. 2001;37: 137-181 Doi: 10.1016/s0272-6386(01)70007-8
  4. Kukita K, Ohira S, Amano I, et al. 2011 update Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy guidelines of vascular access construction and repair for chronic hemodialysis. Ther Apher Dial. 2015;19:1-39. Doi:10.1111/1744*9987.12296
  5. Rakesh N, Sidney R. The KDOQI 2006 vascular access update and fistula first program synopsis. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2009;26(2):122-124. Doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1222455
  6. Polkinghorne KR, Chin GK, MacGinley RJ, et al. KHA-CARI Guideline: Vascular Access- central venous catheters, arteriovenous fistulae and arteriovenous grafts. Nephrology (Carlton). 2013;18(11):701-705. Doi: 10.1111/nep.12132
  7. Maya ID, Allon M. Outcomes of tunneled femoral hemodialysis catheters: Comparison with internal jugular vein catheters. Kidney Int. 2005;68(6):2886-2889. Doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00762.x
  8. Schillinger F, Schillinger D, Montagnac R, Milcent T. Post catheterisation vein stenosis in haemodialysis: Comparative angiographic study of 50 subclavian and 50 internal jugular accesses. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1991;6(10):722-724. Doi: 10.1093/ndt/6.10.722,

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Radiology and Organ Imaging

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

May 29, 2021

Submission Date

March 9, 2021

Acceptance Date

April 10, 2021

Published in Issue

Year 2021 Volume: 7 Number: 2

APA
Çam, İ., Genez, S., Şengül, E., Koç, U., Yalnız, A., Çakır, Ö., Ergül, M., Yaşar, S., Altıntaş Taşlıçay, C., & Çitfçi, E. (2021). Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 168-173. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.884274
AMA
1.Çam İ, Genez S, Şengül E, et al. Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses. KOU Sag Bil Derg. 2021;7(2):168-173. doi:10.30934/kusbed.884274
Chicago
Çam, İsa, Samet Genez, Erkan Şengül, et al. 2021. “Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 7 (2): 168-73. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.884274.
EndNote
Çam İ, Genez S, Şengül E, Koç U, Yalnız A, Çakır Ö, Ergül M, Yaşar S, Altıntaş Taşlıçay C, Çitfçi E (May 1, 2021) Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 7 2 168–173.
IEEE
[1]İ. Çam et al., “Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses”, KOU Sag Bil Derg, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 168–173, May 2021, doi: 10.30934/kusbed.884274.
ISNAD
Çam, İsa - Genez, Samet - Şengül, Erkan - Koç, Ural - Yalnız, Ahmet - Çakır, Özgür - Ergül, Metin - Yaşar, Servan - Altıntaş Taşlıçay, Ceylan - Çitfçi, Ercüment. “Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 7/2 (May 1, 2021): 168-173. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.884274.
JAMA
1.Çam İ, Genez S, Şengül E, Koç U, Yalnız A, Çakır Ö, Ergül M, Yaşar S, Altıntaş Taşlıçay C, Çitfçi E. Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses. KOU Sag Bil Derg. 2021;7:168–173.
MLA
Çam, İsa, et al. “Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses”. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, vol. 7, no. 2, May 2021, pp. 168-73, doi:10.30934/kusbed.884274.
Vancouver
1.İsa Çam, Samet Genez, Erkan Şengül, Ural Koç, Ahmet Yalnız, Özgür Çakır, Metin Ergül, Servan Yaşar, Ceylan Altıntaş Taşlıçay, Ercüment Çitfçi. Evaluation of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters in Different Vascular Accesses. KOU Sag Bil Derg. 2021 May 1;7(2):168-73. doi:10.30934/kusbed.884274

Cited By