1. OUR EXPERIENCE WITH PREVENTION OF COMPLICATIONS OF CAPD CATHETER IMPLANTATION BY BEDSIDE TECHNIQUE - IN DEVELOPING COUNTRY AMONG PATIENTS FROM TRIBAL AREAS OF CHHATTISGARH PRESENTING TO A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL.
- Author
-
Bansal, D., Gupta, P., Gupta, G. B., and Abraham, Georgi
- Subjects
CONTINUOUS ambulatory peritoneal dialysis ,PERITONEAL dialysis ,CATHETERS ,PERITONITIS ,ANESTHESIA ,LIDOCAINE ,DIALYSIS (Chemistry) ,PENTAZOCINE - Abstract
Aim: To compare the complications, clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of Bedside Peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation versus Operation Theatre Implantation. Materials and Methods: Over 24-months period we compared 31 patients(male20, Female 11) on CAPD therapy, 18 were percutaneously placed by nephrology staff (Group P) and 13 were placed using conventional surgical techniques by surgical staff (Group S). In both groups swan neck Tenckhoff catheter was used. Patient was examined for feasibility of bed-side implantation on an OP basis and after counseling and consent the procedure is carried out under sterile technique in a clean room of our dialysis unit. Patient kept nil oral or light breakfast. Soap and water enema was given to patient prior to the procedure. Two hours before and 24 hours after implantation, Inj.Cefazolin 1 gm was given intravenously. Inj. Pentazocine lactate (30mg) and Inj. Promethazine Hcl (50mg) were given intramuscularly one hour before the procedure. Locally Inj. Xylocaine 2% was given subcutaneously 3cms below the umbilicus along the midline and further procedure for bed-side implantation technique was followed and procedure remained uneventful. PD Catheter was immobilized by adhesive plaster at the incision site. Prospective randomized studies have shown that PD catheters placed by nephrologists have lesser complications. In our patients there were no perforations, exit site infection, tunnel infection, pericatheter leak or peritonitis. This approach often introduces rapid initiation of PD, reduces the cost in utilizing an operating room as well as anesthesia services and reduces the morbidity and mortality risk associated with general anesthesia. Results: Total numbers of patients were 31, with 18 patients in Bedside PD catheter implanted group (Group P) and 13 in surgical PDC implanted group (Group S). Post procedure complications in Group P include 2 bleeding effluent and 1 catheter malposition versus 3 bleeding effluent, 2 pericatheter leak, 2 post operative peritonitis, 2 subcutaneous leak and 2 incision hernia in the Group S. Wound healing is better in Group P when compared to Group S. Total hospital stay in the Group P was 3±2 days when compared to 18±2 days in the Group S. Doctors charges for Group P was Rs. 7,500±2,000 when compared to Rs. 12,500±2,000 in the Group S. Bed charges for Group P was Rs. 1,000±500 when compared to Rs. 11,000±4,000. Conclusion: This approach allows rapid initiation of PD, minimizes patient discomfort, reduces hospital stay, surgery cost, bed charges, and operating room as well as anesthesia service charges and helps to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with general anesthesia. In a resource scarce setting, bed-side implantation is a cheaper option and should be practiced in developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2007