Abstract
Introduction: Exchange procedures involve tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) removal and exchange over a wire, using the same exit site and venotomy site. Diagnostic imaging or intervention was generally not performed in exchange procedures. Revision procedures involve placement of new TDC using the previous venotomy site and a new tunnel and exit site. The majority of revisions usually include diagnostic imaging and intervention in the central circulation if needed. Methods: A retrospective single review of 70 patients who underwent 97 TDC replacements from 2010 to early 2012 because of catheter malfunction was evaluated for either infection or malfunction within 30 days of the procedure. Results: There were 41 exchanges and 56 revisions out of the 97 procedures performed. There were eight infections (documented by positive blood culture) in the exchanges (19.5%) and one in the revision group (1.8%). The need for an additional procedure due to malfunction was 10 in the exchange (24.4%) and 10 (17.8%) in the revision group. Conclusions: Revision is a clearly superior procedure with regard to infection and more data need to be gathered as to whether it will decrease repeat procedures.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 328-332 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Journal of Vascular Access |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1 2016 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Exchange
- Infection
- Malfunction
- Revision
- Tunneled dialysis catheter
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
- Nephrology
Cite this
Treatment of tunneled dialysis catheter malfunction : Revision versus exchange. / Wang, Jackson; Nguyen, Tuan A.; Chin, Andrew I; Ross, Jamie Lynn.
In: Journal of Vascular Access, Vol. 17, No. 4, 01.07.2016, p. 328-332.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment of tunneled dialysis catheter malfunction
T2 - Revision versus exchange
AU - Wang, Jackson
AU - Nguyen, Tuan A.
AU - Chin, Andrew I
AU - Ross, Jamie Lynn
PY - 2016/7/1
Y1 - 2016/7/1
N2 - Introduction: Exchange procedures involve tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) removal and exchange over a wire, using the same exit site and venotomy site. Diagnostic imaging or intervention was generally not performed in exchange procedures. Revision procedures involve placement of new TDC using the previous venotomy site and a new tunnel and exit site. The majority of revisions usually include diagnostic imaging and intervention in the central circulation if needed. Methods: A retrospective single review of 70 patients who underwent 97 TDC replacements from 2010 to early 2012 because of catheter malfunction was evaluated for either infection or malfunction within 30 days of the procedure. Results: There were 41 exchanges and 56 revisions out of the 97 procedures performed. There were eight infections (documented by positive blood culture) in the exchanges (19.5%) and one in the revision group (1.8%). The need for an additional procedure due to malfunction was 10 in the exchange (24.4%) and 10 (17.8%) in the revision group. Conclusions: Revision is a clearly superior procedure with regard to infection and more data need to be gathered as to whether it will decrease repeat procedures.
AB - Introduction: Exchange procedures involve tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) removal and exchange over a wire, using the same exit site and venotomy site. Diagnostic imaging or intervention was generally not performed in exchange procedures. Revision procedures involve placement of new TDC using the previous venotomy site and a new tunnel and exit site. The majority of revisions usually include diagnostic imaging and intervention in the central circulation if needed. Methods: A retrospective single review of 70 patients who underwent 97 TDC replacements from 2010 to early 2012 because of catheter malfunction was evaluated for either infection or malfunction within 30 days of the procedure. Results: There were 41 exchanges and 56 revisions out of the 97 procedures performed. There were eight infections (documented by positive blood culture) in the exchanges (19.5%) and one in the revision group (1.8%). The need for an additional procedure due to malfunction was 10 in the exchange (24.4%) and 10 (17.8%) in the revision group. Conclusions: Revision is a clearly superior procedure with regard to infection and more data need to be gathered as to whether it will decrease repeat procedures.
KW - Exchange
KW - Infection
KW - Malfunction
KW - Revision
KW - Tunneled dialysis catheter
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978657363&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978657363&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5301/jva.5000533
DO - 10.5301/jva.5000533
M3 - Article
C2 - 27312750
AN - SCOPUS:84978657363
VL - 17
SP - 328
EP - 332
JO - Journal of Vascular Access
JF - Journal of Vascular Access
SN - 1129-7298
IS - 4
ER -