Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33197001›Full record

SynthesisJournal of nephrology2021

Surgical versus percutaneous catheter placement for peritoneal dialysis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Stepan M Esagian, Georgios A Sideris, Muath Bishawi, Ioannis A Ziogas, Ruediger W Lehrich, John P Middleton, Paul V Suhocki, Theodore N Pappas, Konstantinos P Economopoulos

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of nephrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Analysis of risk factor for peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients.American journal of translational research · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Stepan M EsagianSurgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece.
Georgios A SiderisSurgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece.
Muath BishawiDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Rd, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Ioannis A ZiogasSurgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece.
Ruediger W LehrichDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
John P MiddletonDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Paul V SuhockiDepartment of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Theodore N PappasDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Rd, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Konstantinos P EconomopoulosSurgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece. economopoulos@sni.gr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4856-0405
Duke University · USHellenic Thoracic Society · GRBaystate Medical Center · USDuke Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo consensus currently exists regarding the optimal approach for peritoneal dialysis catheter placement. We aimed to compare the outcomes of percutaneous and surgical peritoneal dialysis catheter placement.

methodsA systematic review of the literature was performed using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases (end-of-search date: August 29th, 2020). We included studies comparing percutaneous (blind, under fluoroscopic/ultrasound guidance, and "half-perc") and surgical peritoneal dialysis catheter placement (open and laparoscopic) in terms of their infectious complications (peritonitis, tunnel/exit-site infections), mechanical complications (leakage, inflow/outflow obstruction, migration, hemorrhage, hernia, bowel perforation) and long-term outcomes (malfunction, removal, replacement, surgery required, and mortality).

resultsThirty-four studies were identified, including thirty-two observational studies (twenty-six retrospective and six prospective) and two randomized controlled trials. Percutaneous placement was associated with significantly lower rates of tunnel/exit-site infection [relative risk (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-0.91], catheter migration (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49, 0.95), and catheter removal (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.88). The 2-week and 4-week rates of early tunnel/exit-site infection were also lower in the percutaneous group (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.93 and RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.63, respectively). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding other outcomes, including catheter survival and mechanical complications.

conclusionOverall, the quality of published literature on the field of peritoneal dialysis catheter placement is poor, with a small percentage of studies being randomized clinical trials. Percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter placement is a safe procedure and may result in fewer complications, such as tunnel/exit-site infections, and catheter migration, compared to surgical placement. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020154951.

Indexed as

Peritoneal DialysisPeritonitisCatheters, IndwellingHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesLaparoscopic catheter placementOpen surgical catheter placementPercutaneous catheter placementPeritoneal dialysis catheter

Identifiers

PMID33197001
OpenAlexW3104280136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.