Randomized prospective comparison of laparoscopic and open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion

Perit Dial Int. 1999 Jul-Aug;19(4):372-5.

Abstract

Objective: To compare laparoscopic and conventional peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion with respect to post operative discomfort, complication rates, and catheter survival.

Design: Randomized prospective study.

Setting: Tertiary referral renal unit.

Patients: Fifty patients commencing peritoneal dialysis.

Intervention: Catheters were implanted laparoscopically or by a conventional surgical technique.

Main outcome measures: The duration of surgery, hospital stay, pain scores, and analgesic requirements were recorded. Complications (early/late) and catheter survival were compared.

Results: The conventional procedure was faster than the laparoscopic (14.3 vs 21.9 minutes, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in any other parameter assessed.

Conclusions: The data suggest that the insertion techniques are equivalent, and that laparoscopic insertion does not reduce early complication rates.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Catheterization / adverse effects
  • Catheterization / methods*
  • Catheters, Indwelling* / adverse effects
  • Device Removal
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Laparoscopy*
  • Length of Stay
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Peritoneal Dialysis / methods*
  • Prospective Studies
  • Survival Analysis