Comparison of symmetrical hemodialysis catheters using computational fluid dynamics

Purpose: Symmetric-tip dialysis catheters have become alternative devices because of low access recirculation and ease of tip positioning. Flow characteristics of three symmetric catheters were compared based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD) as they relate to catheter function. Materials And Methods: In Palindrome, GlidePath, and VectorFloW catheters, a computational fluid dynamics based approach was used to assess W regions of flow separation, which are prone to thrombus development; (ii) shear-induced platelet activation potency; (iii) recirculation; and (iv) venous outflow deflection. A steady-state, laminar flow model simulated: catheter tip position within the superior vena cava. Catheter performance was investigated at high hemodialysis flow rate (400 mL/min). Blood was assumed as a Newtonian fluid. Results: Wide regions of flow separation downstream of the Palindrome side slot and close to the distal tip were observed in forward and reversed line configurations. Geometric asymmetry of the distal guide wire aperture of the GlidePath catheter produced the highest levels of inverted velocity flow when run in reversed configuration. The lowest mean shear-induced platelet activation was exhibited by GlidePath and VectorFloW catheters; the Palindrome catheter exhibited 152% higher overall platelet activation potency. All catheters were associated with a recirculation close to zero; the helically contoured lumens of the VectorFlow catheter produced the greatest amount of deflection of venous flow away from the arterial lumen. Conclusions: The VectorFlow catheter produced less shear-induced platelet activation than the Palindrome catheter and less flow separation than the Palindrome and GlidePath catheters irrespective of line configuration These findings have,potential implications for differences in thrombogenic risk during clinical performance of these catheters

Making co-enrolment feasible for randomised controlled trials in paediatric intensive care.

Enrolling children into several trials could increase recruitment and lead to quicker delivery of optimal care in paediatric intensive care units (PICU). We evaluated decisions taken by clinicians and parents in PICU on co-enrolment for two large pragmatic trials: the CATCH trial (CATheters in CHildren) comparing impregnated with standard central venous catheters (CVCs) for reducing bloodstream infection in PICU and the CHIP trial comparing tight versus standard control of hyperglycaemia

Policies for replacing long-term indwelling urinary catheters in adults

We would also like to thank the foll owing Cochrane Incontinence editorial base staff members for their help and support with this re-view: Cathryn Glazener, Sheila Wallace, Mandy Fader, Peter Her-bison and Suzanne Macdonald. The review authors are grateful to Toby Lasseron for his advice. The review authors are thankful to Dr Beverly Priefer for responding to our query about Priefer 1982. Policies for replacing long‐term indwelling urinary catheters in adults, Protocol, Fergus PM Cooper, Cameron Edwin Alexander, Sanjay Sinha, Muhammad Imran Omar; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011115; 14 May 2014Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Risk factors for central venous catheter-related infections in surgical and intensive care units. The Central Venous Catheter-Related Infections Study Group.

To identify avoidable risk factors for central venous catheter (CVC) infections in patients undergoing short-term catheterization

Willingness to participate in a randomized trial comparing catheters to fistulas for vascular access in incident hemodialysis patients: an international survey of nephrologists

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines favor fistulas over catheters as vascular access. Yet, the observational literature comparing fistulas to catheters has important limitations and biases that may be difficult to overcome in the absence of randomization. However, it is not clear if physicians would be willing to participate in a clinical trial comparing fistulas to catheters. OBJECTIVES: We also sought to elicit participants' opinions on willingness to participate in a future trial regarding catheters and fistulas. DESIGN: We created a three-part survey consisting of 19 questions. We collected demographic information, respondents' knowledge of the vascular access literature, appropriateness of current guideline recommendations, and their willingness to participate in a future trial. SETTING: Participants were recruited from Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Participants include physicians and trainees who are involved in the care of end-stage renal disease patients requiring vascular access. MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics were used to describe baseline characteristics of respondents according to geographic location. We used logistic regression to model willingness to participate in a future trial. METHODS: We surveyed nephrologists from Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand to assess their willingness to participate in a randomized trial comparing fistulas to catheters in incident hemodialysis patients. RESULTS: Our results show that in Canada, 86 % of respondents were willing to participate in a trial (32 % in all patients; 54 % only in patients at high risk of primary failure). In Europe and Australia/New Zealand, the willingness to participate in a trial that included all patients was lower (28 % in Europe; 25 % in Australia/New Zealand), as was a trial that included patients at high risk of primary failure (38 % in Europe; 39 % in Australia/New Zealand). Nephrologists who have been in practice for a few years, saw a larger volume of patients, or self-identified as experts in vascular access literature were more likely to participate in a trial. LIMITATIONS: Survey distribution was limited to vascular access experts in participating European countries and ultimately led to a discrepancy in numbers of European to non-European respondents overall. Canadian views are likely over-represented in the overall outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey results suggest that nephrologists believe there is equipoise surrounding the optimal vascular access strategy and that a randomized controlled study should be undertaken, but restricted to those individuals with a high risk of primary fistula failure