Comparison between Two Methods of Central Venous Catheter Placement in Hemodialysis Patients
Background: Central venous catheter is one the best and fastest ways to access the blood flow. Disadvantages of catheter insertion include early and late complications. In this study, we compared these complications in classic and tunneled methods. Methods: In a prospective study in 2008 in Alzahra...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
Vesnu Publications
2012-07-01
|
| Series: | مجله دانشکده پزشکی اصفهان |
| Online Access: | http://jims.mui.ac.ir/index.php/jims/article/view/1117 |
| Summary: | Background: Central venous catheter is one the best and fastest ways to access the blood flow. Disadvantages of catheter insertion include early and late complications. In this study, we compared these complications in classic and tunneled methods.
Methods: In a prospective study in 2008 in Alzahra Hospital (Isfahan, Iran), we compared the frequency of short-term (24-hour) and long-term (one-month) catheter-related complications in 60 hemodialysis patients. Patients were randomized into two groups. In the first group, catheters were placed via the classic method and in the second group, tunneled method was used. Finally, data was analyzed in SPSS16.
Findings: The mean duration of catheter remaining was significantly higher in the tunneled group compared to the classic group (P < 0.0001). The frequency of early complications in the 2 groups showed no significant difference (P > 0.05). Similarly, the frequency of thrombosis was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.093). However, the frequency of infection and catheter failure in the tunneled group were less than the classic group (P < 0.0001).
Conclusion: Tunneled catheterization is an effective and safe method for placement of vascular access in hemodialysis patients.
Keywords: Central venous catheter, Hemodialysis, Percutaneous method, Complications |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1027-7595 1735-854X |