Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion, the LOCI-trial: a study protocol

Background: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. It allows patients more freedom to perform daily activities compared to haemodialysis. Key to successful PD is the presence of a well-functioning dialysis catheter. Several complications, such as in- and outflow obstruction, peritonitis, exit-site infections, leakage and migration, can lead to catheter removal and loss of peritoneal access. Currently, different surgical techniques are in practice for PD-catheter placement. The type of insertion technique used may greatly influence the occurrence of complications. In the literature, up to 35% catheter failure has been described when using the open technique and only 13% for the laparoscopic technique. However, a

Laparoscopic Placement of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheters in CAPD Patients: Complications and Survival

Background: Laparoscopic techniques for the placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters are becoming increasingly popular. Recently, with the improvements in laparoscopic surgery, various methods for the insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters have been reported, indicating that the laparoscopic insertion is preferred over the open and percutaneous techniques. The aim of this study was to introduce and assess a simplified laparoscopic method for the insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients.Methods: We enrolled 79 consecutive end-stage renal patients (46 men and 33 women) with a mean age of 50 years (range: 19-83 years) in this study. During the surgery, a 5-mm trocar was placed in the left upper quadrant for the optics and another 5-mm trocar was placed to the left of the umbilicus. Using the second trocar, a tunnel was formed 2 cm left of the umbilical plane for the insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter. Under direct vision, the catheter was advanced into the abdomen. The catheter was tested for patency. Catheters of all subjects were capped for two weeks before dialysis initiation.Results: The mean duration of the operation was 15 minutes. Ten patients died during the follow-up period, all due to other medical problems, and six patients underwent renal transplantation; however, no deaths or complications were observed during surgery. Early onset complications were seen in 12 patients (15.1%). The most frequent late-onset medical and mechanical complications were peritonitis (6.3%) and hernia (3.7%). During a follow-up period of four years, removal of the catheter was required in two patients as a result of peritonitis.Conclusion: We obtained a low complication rate and a high catheter survival rate with this laparoscopic insertion of the Tenckhoff catheter. We believe future experience will encourage the use of this safe, simple and quick procedure

Laparoscopic versus Open Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion:A Meta-Analysis

<p>Background: Peritoneal dialysis is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. Key to successful peritoneal dialysis is a well-functioning catheter. The different insertion techniques may be of great importance. Mostly, the standard operative approach is the open technique; however, laparoscopic insertion is increasingly popular. Catheter malfunction is reported up to 35% for the open technique and up to 13% for the laparoscopic technique. However, evidence is lacking to definitely conclude that the laparoscopic approach is to be preferred. This review and meta-analysis was carried out to investigate if one of the techniques is superior to the other.</p><p>Methods: Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2012, issue 10). Reference lists were searched manually. The methodology was in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for interventional systematic reviews, and written based on the PRISMA-statement.</p><p>Results: Three randomized controlled trials and eight cohort studies were identified. Nine postoperative outcome measures were meta-analyzed; of these, seven were not different between operation techniques. Based on the meta-analysis, the proportion of migrating catheters was lower (odds ratio (OR) 0.21, confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.63; P = 0.006), and the one-year catheter survival was higher in the laparoscopic group (OR 3.93, CI 1.80 to 8.57; P = 0.0006).</p><p>Conclusions: Based on these results there is some evidence in favour of the laparoscopic insertion technique for having a higher one-year catheter survival and less migration, which would be clinically relevant.</p>