Blog
About

1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      A Prospective Study to Compare Subcutaneously Buried Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Technique with Conventional Technique

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims: To reduce peritoneal dialysis-related infections, Moncrief-Popovich (MP) designed a special catheter and implantation technique. Herein we report our experience of patients treated with the MP and conventional approach. Methods: A total of 214 patients were divided into three groups according to catheter type and implantation technique: group A received a MP catheter (MPC) via MP technique (n = 27); group B received Tenckhoff catheters via MP technique (n = 32), and group C received Tenckhoff catheters via conventional technique (n = 155). Data were collected for infection and catheter survival. Results: The catheter survival and peritonitis rate was similar in our study groups. Age was found to be the significant factor associated with peritonitis rate. Conclusions: Although the MP technique was not associated with a lower peritonitis rate in our practice, the possible benefit of less healthcare costs is still considerable.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Initial subcutaneous embedding of the peritoneal dialysis catheter-a critical appraisal of this new implantation technique

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Modelling peritonitis rates and associated risk factors for individuals on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

             E F Vonesh (1990)
            A mixed effects Poisson regression model is proposed for analysing potential risk factors associated with peritonitis, a bacterial infection of the peritoneum which is common among individuals on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). The model incorporates a set of fixed effects corresponding to concomitant information collected across individuals as well as a random effect due to individuals. The method of maximum likelihood is used to estimate the unknown parameters. When applied to clinical data obtained on 81 CAPD patients from four centres, the mixed effects model demonstrated a much better fit than the corresponding fixed effects Poisson regression model.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The Moncrief-Popovich Catheter

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BPU
                Blood Purif
                10.1159/issn.0253-5068
                Blood Purification
                S. Karger AG
                0253-5068
                1421-9735
                2007
                July 2007
                23 March 2007
                : 25
                : 3
                : 229-232
                Affiliations
                aDepartment of Nephrology, E-Da Hospital, Kaohsiung, bDepartment of Statistics, National Cheng-Kung University, and cDepartment of Nephrology, Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
                Article
                101027 Blood Purif 2007;25:229–232
                10.1159/000101027
                17384502
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, References: 13, Pages: 4
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Comments

                Comment on this article