2 research outputs found
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 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 nontunnelled 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; 9