Comparative outcomes of image-guided percutaneous catheterization versus direct visualization catheterization for peritoneal dialysis: A meta-analysis

影像引导下经皮穿刺置管与直接可视化穿刺置管在腹膜透析中的疗效比较:一项荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Debate persists on the optimal catheterization method for peritoneal dialysis (PD). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of image-guided percutaneous catheterization (IGPC) versus direct visualization catheterization (DVC) for peritoneal dialysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the inception of the database until July 16, 2024, four databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the central database) were searched for literature comparing IGPC versus DVC for peritoneal dialysis. Meta-analyses were conducted on infectious complications, mechanical complications, one-year PD catheter survival, and catheter removal rates. RESULTS: Totally 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising a total of 8,981 patients, of which 2,518 patients received IGPC and 6,463 patients received DVC. IGPC exhibited lower rates of infection complications (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.99, P = 0.04) mechanical complications (OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.42-0.99, P = 0.04) and catheter removal compared to DVC (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.50-0.78, P < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference in one-year PD catheter survival between the two groups (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.78-2.27, P = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis concluded that IGPC was a safe and effective catheterization method for PD. The results demonstrated that IGPC significantly reduced the incidence of infection complications, mechanical complications, and catheter removal compared to DVC. No notable disparity in one-year PD survival was detected between the two groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42024606795).

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。