Transhepatic Hemodialysis Catheters: Functional Outcome and Comparison Between Early and Late Failure

Younes, Houssam K.; Pettigrew, Candace D.; Anaya‐Ayala, Javier E.; Soltes, George D.; Saad, Wael E.A.; Davies, Mark G.; Lumsden, Alan B.; Peden, Eric K.

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.10.011

Cited by 40 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The source of infection was probably catheters in those cases where a source could not be found. Although our infection incidence was lower than in other series, it is obvious that the transjugular approach is more reliable in regard to infection rates (0.007/100) (2)(3)(4)12). …”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 75%

“…The transhepatic route was initially suggested to be used for a short time only and transiently until ensuring the maturity of other venous access routes (9). It was used as a transient route in the series of Smith et al (3) before AV grafting in three patients and subcutaneous port placement in two patients, and in the series of Younes et al (4) before AV fistula opening in four patients and peritoneal dialysis in two patients. Twelve of our cases were still continuing hemodialysis through their patent transhepatic catheters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Safety and functionality of transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in chronic hemodialysis patients

Şanal

Nas²,

Doğan³

et al. 2016

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he main central venous routes used in chronic hemodialysis patients with insufficient arteriovenous (AV) fistulas and graft failure are the jugular, subclavian, and femoral veins. Repeated interventions and chronic thrombosis, stenosis, and occlusions secondary to long-term catheterizations can make the use of these veins impossible over years (1,2). Alternative routes are lifesaving in these cases, and the principle routes are the translumbar inferior vena cava (IVC) and transhepatic veins (2-5).The use of the translumbar route is more widespread, its efficiency and safety are well known, and the experience in using this method has already been reported in the literature (5-8). Hepatic vein and IVC catheterization through the transhepatic route is a comparatively more up-to-date method than the one through the translumbar route, and there is only limited experience in using this method. Its success and complication rates were first described by Po et al. (9) in 1994 in one case, and this method was further scrutinized in three retrospective studies comprising 12, 16, and 22 adult patients in the following years (2-4).The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the safety and functionality of transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in a series of 38 patients. Methods PatientsThe study was approved by the local ethics committee. Thirty-eight transhepatic tunneled hemodialysis catheter implanted patients (mean age 58±11 years; range, 23-80 years; I N T E R V E N T I O N A L R A D I O LO G Y O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E PURPOSEWe aimed to investigate the safety and functionality of tunneled transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in chronic hemodialysis patients. METHODSThirty-eight patients (20 women aged 56±10 years and 18 men aged 61±11 years) with transhepatic tunneled hemodialysis catheters were evaluated. The date of the first transhepatic catheterization, indications, procedure details, functional time periods of catheters, reasons for the removal or revision of catheters, catheter-related complications, and current conditions of patients were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTSA total of 69 catheters were properly placed in all patients (100% technical success) under imaging guidance during the 91-month follow-up period. The functionality of 35 catheters could not be evaluated: five catheters were removed because of noncomplication related reasons (surgical fistulas were opened in two cases [2/35, 5.7%], transplantation was performed in three cases [3/35, 8.6%]), 18 patients died while their catheters were functional (18/35, 51.4%), and 12 catheters were still functional at the time of the study (12/35, 34.3%). The functionality of catheters was evaluated the remaining 34 catheters that necessitated revision because of complications. Furthermore, only half of the catheters were functional on day 136 when evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The four main complications were thrombosis (16/34, 47%; complication rate of 0.37 days in 100 catheters), infection (8/34, 23.5%; 0.18 days in 100 catheters), m...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and functionality of transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in chronic hemodialysis patients

Şanal

Nas²,

Doğan³

et al. 2016

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The median initial catheter interval of TLDC was 64 days, which was similar to the transhepatic hemodialysis catheter survival ranging from 27-141 days (22,23,24). While 64% of our patients had initial catheter interval for >30 days, 32% retained catheters for >12 months with reinsertions/exchanges.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Patency and Complications of Translumbar Dialysis Catheters

2014

American Journal of Kidney Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Translumbar inferior vena caval CVCs belong to this category and it seems that they can offer a relatively safe and effective long-term HD access [87] . Another alternative is the transhepatic HD catheters; they seem to be a potentially viable option with low rates of morbidity due to placement, high rates of catheter-related maintenance and the possibility of long-term functionality [88] .…”

Section: Tunneled Hd Cathetermentioning

confidence: 99%

Vascular access today

Pantelias

Grapsa²

2012

WJN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of patients with chronic kidney disease requiring renal replacement therapy has increased worldwide. The most common replacement therapy is hemodialysis (HD). Vascular access (VA) has a key role for successful treatment. Despite the advances that have taken place in the field of the HD procedure, few things have changed with regards to VA in recent years. Arteriovenous fistula (AVF), polytetrafluoroethylene graft and the cuffed double lumen silicone catheter are the most common used for VA. In the long term, a number of complications may present and more than one VA is needed during the HD life. The most common complications for all of VA types are thrombosis, bleeding and infection, the most common cause of morbidity in these patients. It has been estimated that VA dysfunction is responsible for 20% of all hospitalizations. The annual cost of placing and looking after dialysis VA in the United States exceeds 1 billion dollars per year. A good functional access is also vital in order to deliver adequate HD therapy. It seems that the native AVF that Brescia and Cimino described in 1966 still remains the first choice for VA. The native forearm AVFs have the longest survival and require the fewest interventions. For this reason, the forearm AVF is the first choice, followed by the upper-arm AVF, the arteriovenous graft and the cuffed central venous catheter is the final choice. In conclusion, VA remains the most important issue for patients on HD and despite the technical improvements, a number of problems and complications have to be resolved.

show abstract

Transhepatic Hemodialysis Catheters: Functional Outcome and Comparison Between Early and Late Failure

Cited by 40 publications

References 23 publications

Safety and functionality of transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in chronic hemodialysis patients

Safety and functionality of transhepatic hemodialysis catheters in chronic hemodialysis patients

Patency and Complications of Translumbar Dialysis Catheters

Vascular access today

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About