See the published version of this preprint at BMC Nephrology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Jianhui Zhou
Chinese PLA General Hospital
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
A large body mass index (BMI) has been considered as a relative contraindication for percutaneous catheter insertion, although this technique has many advantages. Up to now, there are few studies on peritoneal catheter placement and obesity. The aim of this study was to determine whether patients with large BMI can also choose the percutaneous technique for peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion.
Methods
187 consecutive patients underwent peritoneal catheter insertions in the Chinese PLA General Hospital between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016, with 178 eligible cases being included in the analysis. Two groups were created based on the catheter insertion techniques, the percutaneous group (group P) and the surgical group (group S). Subgroups were created according to BMI>28 or≤28. The outcomes included catheter related complications and catheter survival.
Results
Total infectious complication rates were significantly lower in group P than in group S. The late peritonitis rates tended to be lower in group P than in group S, although the difference was not significant. There were no significant differences in all other measured complications between the two groups. Though the one-year infection-free catheter survival in group P was 7.5% higher than group S, the difference was not significant. The one-year dysfunction-free catheter survival, one-year dysfunction-and-infection-free catheter survival, and overall catheter survival were similar between the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed a superior one-year infection-free catheter survival of percutaneous technique in patients with BMI>28, which was confirmed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
Conclusions
Despite the challenges that may be encountered with patients who have a large BMI, the percutaneous technique is a safe and effective approach to placing a peritoneal dialysis catheter.
Keywords
Peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion, percutaneous, complication, survival, BMI
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Nephrology.
No community comments so far
Review #1 received
Received 03 Mar, 2020
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 03 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 01 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 18 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 17 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 17 Feb, 2020
Version 1
Posted 15 Jun, 2019
Community comments: 6
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 14 Jan, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 15 Dec, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 15 Dec, 2019
Review #3 received
Received 04 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 03 Dec, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Editor assigned
On 17 Jun, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 13 Jun, 2019
Editor invited
On 13 Jun, 2019
First submitted
On 27 May, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Urology & Nephrology
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Nephrology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Jianhui Zhou
Chinese PLA General Hospital
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Nephrology.
No community comments so far
Review #1 received
Received 03 Mar, 2020
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 03 Mar, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 01 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Feb, 2020
Editor assigned
On 18 Feb, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Feb, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 17 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 17 Feb, 2020
Version 1
Posted 15 Jun, 2019
Community comments: 6
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 14 Jan, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 15 Dec, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 15 Dec, 2019
Review #3 received
Received 04 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 03 Dec, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Editor assigned
On 17 Jun, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 13 Jun, 2019
Editor invited
On 13 Jun, 2019
First submitted
On 27 May, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Urology & Nephrology
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Nephrology.
Background
A large body mass index (BMI) has been considered as a relative contraindication for percutaneous catheter insertion, although this technique has many advantages. Up to now, there are few studies on peritoneal catheter placement and obesity. The aim of this study was to determine whether patients with large BMI can also choose the percutaneous technique for peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion.
Methods
187 consecutive patients underwent peritoneal catheter insertions in the Chinese PLA General Hospital between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016, with 178 eligible cases being included in the analysis. Two groups were created based on the catheter insertion techniques, the percutaneous group (group P) and the surgical group (group S). Subgroups were created according to BMI>28 or≤28. The outcomes included catheter related complications and catheter survival.
Results
Total infectious complication rates were significantly lower in group P than in group S. The late peritonitis rates tended to be lower in group P than in group S, although the difference was not significant. There were no significant differences in all other measured complications between the two groups. Though the one-year infection-free catheter survival in group P was 7.5% higher than group S, the difference was not significant. The one-year dysfunction-free catheter survival, one-year dysfunction-and-infection-free catheter survival, and overall catheter survival were similar between the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed a superior one-year infection-free catheter survival of percutaneous technique in patients with BMI>28, which was confirmed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
Conclusions
Despite the challenges that may be encountered with patients who have a large BMI, the percutaneous technique is a safe and effective approach to placing a peritoneal dialysis catheter.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Loading...