Objective To elucidate the factors leading to catheter loss from recurrent infection in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). Design All catheters removed from patients were prospectively examined for infection. Setting CAPD unit in large tertiary-care general hospital. Patients Sixty-five consecutive patients undergoing catheter removal for whatever cause; 20 catheters rejected because of desiccation or contamination in transit. Interventions None. Main Outcome Measures Micro-organisms linked to catheter removal; their locations on removed catheters. Results Of 45 catheters removed between January 1994 and August 1995, 26 were infected: 13/26 infections were caused by Staphylococcus aureus and 7/26 by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In only one case was S. epidermidis associated with catheter removal. The most striking finding was that the inner cuff harbored large numbers of the infecting organisms, even when antibiotics had eradicated them from the peritoneal cavity and exit site, where present, and the catheter lumen. Conclusion The importance of S. aureus and Ps. aeruginosa rather than S. epidermidis in catheter loss due to relapsing infection is confirmed. Persistence of the causative organisms in the inner cuff is a likely explanation for relapse after treatment, and might be due to the predominantly intraperitoneal administration of antibiotics. A clinical trial of the effect on catheter retention of empirical use of systemic or oral agents that give high tissue levels and are active against intracellular microorganisms, along with recommended intraperitoneal regimens, is indicated.
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are a safe and effective form of treatment for erythrocytosis developing after renal transplantation. The mechanism of action, however, is not mediated by changes in erythropoietin production and remains uncertain.
A total of 1016 consecutive renal transplants performed between 1976 and 1990 were analysed retrospectively to determine the incidence of urological complications and possible predisposing factors. Some 189 episodes of ureteric obstruction and/or urinary leak occurred in 143 patients (overall incidence 14.1%). The median annual rate of urinary leak was 5.1%; that of ureteric obstruction was 4.5% pre-1986 and 16.1% post-1986. Sixty-three episodes of urinary leak occurred in 54 patients from 1 day to 3 months post-transplant and 60% involved the distal ureter. Thirty were treated primarily by reconstructive surgery, ten required nephrectomy and three died of associated sepsis. A total of 126 episodes of ureteric obstruction occurred in 104 patients from 1 day to 12 years post-transplant and 86% involved the distal ureter. Prior to 1986, 10/11 patients with ureteric obstruction were treated by reconstructive surgery, but since then 88 (95%) have been treated by percutaneous nephrostomy, with or without stenting, with only one graft lost and no deaths. Children had a significantly increased incidence of ureteric obstruction (P < 0.001) whilst male recipients had an increased incidence of urinary leak (P = 0.04). More patients with ureteric obstruction than those without had two or more episodes of rejection (P = 0.03). No single cause for the increased incidence of ureteric obstruction since 1986 has been identified. Continued attention to technical detail and further study of this trend is warranted.
Incentives for organ donation, currently prohibited in most countries, may increase donation and save lives. Discussion of incentives has focused on two areas: (1) whether or not there are ethical principles that justify the current prohibition and (2) whether incentives would do more good than harm. We herein address the second concern and propose for discussion standards and guidelines for an acceptable system of incentives for donation. We believe that if systems based on these guidelines were developed, harms would be no greater than those to today’s conventional donors. Ultimately, until there are trials of incentives, the question of benefits and harms cannot be satisfactorily answered.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.