ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2021
From "feeling" to "seeing": modification of the percutaneous peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion with an optical puncture system.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBlind insertion limits the application of percutaneous peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter placement. In this study, we first described the use of an optical puncture system in the PD catheter insertion, and investigated the feasibility and advantages of this modified technique.
methodsThis retrospective study included 65 patients with chronic kidney disease stage 5 (CKD5) who received ultrasound-guided percutaneous PD catheter insertion with or without optical puncture system assistance between June 2018 and July 2019. The patients' characteristics as well as the surgical outcomes and complications were compared between the modified group and the routine percutaneous insertion group.
resultsTwenty-five patients underwent optical puncture system assistant insertion, whereas 40 patients received routine percutaneous insertion. More patients had previous abdominal surgical histories in the modified group than those in the routine group (24.0% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.047). The time of accessing to the abdominal cavity was significantly shorter in the modified group (median [IQR]; 1.1 min [0.8-1.3] vs. 5.0 min [4.0-6.0]; p < 0.001). Meanwhile, the time of the whole procedure was also significantly shorter in the modified group (median [IQR]; 26.0 min [25.0-29.0] vs. 33.0 min [29.0-35.0]; p < 0.001). None of the patient in the modified group, while two patients (5.0%) in the routine group converted to open procedure. There were no significant differences in the short and long postoperative complications between the two groups.
conclusionsThe operation of ultrasound-guided PD catheter placement with the optical puncture system is easy, safe, fast and accurate, whereby the PD catheter can be implanted percutaneously and visually under local anesthesia with minimal procedure-related complications. The visible puncture of the optical puncture system may facilitate ultrasound-guided percutaneous PD catheter insertion in patients with obesity and previous abdominal surgeries.
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.