title: A comparative analysis of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for peritoneal catheter placement.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is the preferred available option of renal replacement therapy for a significant number of end-stage kidney disease patients. A major limiting factor to the successful continuation of PD is the long-term viability of the PD catheter (PDC). Bedside percutaneous placement of the PDC is not commonly practiced despite published data encouraging use of this technique. Its advantages include faster recovery and avoidance of general anesthesia.
  
  
  METHODS
  We carried out a retrospective analysis of the outcomes of 313 PDC insertions at our center, comparing all percutaneous PDC insertions between July 1998 and April 2010 (group P, n = 151) with all surgical PDC insertions between January 2003 and April 2010 (group S, n = 162).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Compared with group P patients, significantly more group S patients had undergone previous abdominal surgery or PDC insertion (41.8% vs 9.3% and 33.3% vs 3.3% respectively, p = 0.00). More exit-site leaks occurred in group P than in group S (20.5% vs 6.8%, p = 0.002). The overall incidence of peritonitis was higher in group S than in group P (1 episode in 19 catheter-months vs 1 episode in 26 catheter-months, p = 0.017), but the groups showed no significant difference in the peritonitis rate within 1 month of catheter insertion (5% in group P vs 7.4% in group S, p = 0.4) or in poor initial drainage or secondary drainage failure (9.9% vs 11.7%, p = 0.1, and 7.9% vs 12.3%, p = 0.38, for groups P and S respectively).Technical survival at 3 months was significantly better for group P than for group S (86.6% vs 77%, p = 0.037); at 12 months, it was 77.7% and 68.7% respectively (p = 0.126). No life-threatening complications attributable to the insertion of the PDC occurred in either group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our analysis demonstrates further encouraging outcomes of percutaneous PDC placement compared with open surgical placement. However, the members of the percutaneous insertion group were primarily a selected subset of patients without prior abdominal surgery or PDC insertion, therefore limiting the comparability of the groups. Studies addressing such confounding factors are required. Local expertise in catheter placement techniques may affect the generalizability of results.
authors.affiliation: Nephrology, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. smedani@doctors.org.uk
authors.forename: Samar
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Medani
authors.forename: Mohamed
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Shantier
authors.forename: Wael
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Hussein
authors.forename: Catherine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Wall
authors.forename: George
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Mellotte
mesh_terms: D002404:Catheterization / Q000379:methods*; D015986:Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic; D006801:Humans; D010530:Peritoneal Dialysis / Q000379:methods*; D012189:Retrospective Studies