Trial reportInternational urology and nephrology2015
The placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a prospective randomized comparison of open surgery versus "Mini-Perc" technique.
Trial report in International urology and nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Catheter insertion techniques for improving catheter function and clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Catheter type, placement and insertion techniques for preventing catheter-related infections in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in Children: Initial Experience with a "2+1"-Port Laparoscopic-Assisted Technique.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- From "feeling" to "seeing": modification of the percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion with an optical puncture system.International urology and nephrology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrently, most ESRD patients are treated with open surgical technique or with laparoscopic technique. In this study, we examined the role of the ureteroscope-assisted "Mini-Perc" technique versus the modified open surgery in the treatment of ESRD in a prospective randomized manner.
methodsA total of 72 patients with chronic renal failure were prospectively randomized for the ureteroscope-assisted "Mini-Perc" technique or modified open surgery. Intraoperative and postoperative morbidity, incision size, dose of local anesthesia, operative time, hospital stay, and initial catheter survival and follow-up were compared for both methods.
results"Mini-Perc" group was associated with shorter incision size, operative time, and hospital stay, with lower dose of local anesthesia and incidence of bloody ascites. Two of five patients with the history of abdominal surgery in "Mini-Perc" group required adhesiolysis under direct vision of telescope. All adhesions were easily dissected. All complications of leakage (8.1 %) and incisional hernia (2.7 %) occurred in the open surgery group, but a difference of no significant value with "Mini-Perc" group (p = 0.2400, p = 1.0000). There was no any other significant difference in common complications between two groups. After 2 years of follow-up, 54 patients (75 %) survived with their initial PD catheter. The overall death was 5 (6.9 %).
conclusionsCompared to modified open surgical technique, the ureteroscope-assisted "Mini-Perc" technique can be used to achieve the same clinical efficacy for placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters in ESRD patients, and it carries minimal morbidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.