The current consensus recommended the peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) techniques based on the patients’ anesthesia situation and previous abdominal surgery. However, the research comparing of all the existing PDC techniques is lacking. The objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of PDC techniques by network meta-analysis (NMA). A systematic review of databases was conducted to identify eligible studies. NMA was used to estimate the ranking for endpoints. Our NMA included 41 studies (9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 32 observational trials) and enrolled 3902 patients, comparing three techniques: the laparoscopic catheterization (LC), open surgery catheterization (OSC), and percutaneous catheterization (PC). NMA in RCTs showed OSC had the highest incidence of catheter mechanical dysfunction, PC and LC were very similar, but this result had no statistical difference. NMA in observational studies showed that LC had the highest 1-year catheter survival but without statistical difference (LC vs. OSC: odds ratio (OR) 1.75, 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 0.90–3.40; PC vs. OSC: OR 1.55, 95% CrIs 0.80–2.97; PC vs. LC: OR 0.88, 95% CrIs 0.54–1.44). OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. The complications of leakage, peritonitis, and exit/tunnel infection were inconclusive due to the inconsistent results between RCTs and observational studies. Our NMA revealed LC may have the best 1-year catheter survival. PC and LC might be efficacious in lowering the mechanical dysfunction. OSC had the lowest incidence for bleeding. More RCTs with larger scale and higher quality are needed in order to obtain more credible evidence.
PeppelenboschAvan KuijkWHBouvyND, et al.Peritoneal dialysis catheter placement technique and complications. NDT Plus2008; 1(Suppl 4): iv23–iv28.
2.
LiZTangXHLiQ, et al.Ultrasound-guided oblique sub-costal transversus abdominis plane block as the principal anesthesia technique in peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation and plasma ropivacaine concentration evaluation in ESRD patients: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial. Perit Dial Int2018; 38(3): 192–199.
3.
CrabtreeJHShresthaBMChowKM, et al.Creating and maintaining optimal peritoneal dialysis access in the adult patient: 2019 update. Perit Dial Int2019; 39(5): 414–436.
XieHZhangWChengJ, et al.Laparoscopic versus open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Nephrol2012; 13: 69.
6.
HtayHJohnsonDWCraigJC, et al.Catheter type, placement and insertion techniques for preventing catheter-related infections in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2019; 5: CD004680.
7.
HagenSMLafrancaJASteyerbergEW, et al.Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a meta-analysis. PLoS One2013; 8(2): e56351.
8.
ChenYShaoYXuJ.The survival and complication rates of laparoscopic versus open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2015; 25(5): 440–443.
9.
QiaoQZhouLHuK, et al.Laparoscopic versus traditional peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a meta analysis. Ren Fail2016; 38(5): 838–848.
10.
BoujelbaneLFuNChaplaK, et al.Percutaneous versus surgical insertion of PD catheters in dialysis patients: a meta-analysis. J Vasc Access2015; 16(6): 498–505.
11.
TullavardhanaTAkranurakkulPUngkitphaiboonW, et al.Surgical versus percutaneous techniques for peritoneal dialysis catheter placement: a meta-analysis of the outcomes. Ann Med Surg (Lond)2016; 10: 11–18.
12.
ShresthaBMShresthaDKumarA, et al.Advanced laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: systematic review and meta-analysis. Perit Dial Int2018; 38(3): 163–171.
13.
NikolakopoulouAMavridisDEggerM, et al.Continuously updated network meta-analysis and statistical monitoring for timely decision-making. Stat Methods Med Res2018; 27(5): 1312–1330.
14.
LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJ, et al.The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol2009; 62(10): e1–e34.
15.
HigginsJGreenS.Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Exp Pathol Pharmakol2011; 5(2): S38.
16.
WellsGASheaBO’ConnellD, et al.The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analyses. University of Ottawa, Canada, http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm(accessed 3 September 2010).
17.
ChaimaniAHigginsJPTMavridisD, et al.Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One2013; 8: e76654.
18.
VossDHawkinsSPooleG, et al.Radiological versus surgical implantation of first catheter for peritoneal dialysis: a randomized non-inferiority trial. Nephrol Dial Transplant2012; 27(11): 4196–4204.
19.
JwoSCChenKSLeeCC, et al.Prospective randomized study for comparison of open surgery with laparoscopic-assisted placement of Tenckhoff peritoneal dialysis catheter—a single center experience and literature review. J Surg Res2010; 159(1): 489–496.
20.
AtapourAAsadabadiHRKarimiS, et al.Comparing the outcomes of open surgical procedure and percutaneously peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion using laparoscopic needle: a two month follow-up study. J Res Med Sci2011; 16(4): 463–468.
21.
TsimoyiannisECSiakasPGlantzounisG, et al.Laparoscopic placement of the Tenckhoff catheter for peritoneal dialysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2000; 10(4): 218–221.
22.
van LaanenJHHCornelisTMeesBM, et al.Randomized controlled trial comparing open versus laparoscopic placement of a peritoneal dialysis catheter and outcomes: the CAPD I trial. Perit Dial Int2018; 38(2): 104–112.
23.
WrightMJBel’eedKJohnsonBF, et al.Randomized prospective comparison of laparoscopic and open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. Perit Dial Int1999; 19(4): 372–375.
24.
GadallahMFPervezAEl-ShahawyMA, et al.Peritoneoscopic versus surgical placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a prospective randomized study on outcome. Am J Kidney Dis1999; 33(1): 118–122.
25.
XuTZangLXieJ, et al.Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic and conventional placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters in patients with ESRD. Chinese J Nephrol Dial Transplant2010; 19(5): 430–434.
26.
QiaoQLuGYXuDY, et al.Comparison of the efficacy of two kinds of peritoneal dialysis catheterization. Jiangsu Med2012; 38(23): 2812–2814.
27.
BircanHYKulahE. Effects of a novel peritoneal dialysis: the open versus laparoscopic preperitoneal tunneling technique. Ther Apher Dial2016; 20(1): 66–72.
28.
DraganicBJamesABoothM, et al.Comparative experience of a simple technique for laparoscopic chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis catheter placement. ANZ J Surg1998; 68(10): 735–739.
29.
BaeIEChungWKChoiST, et al.Laparoscopic internal fixation is a viable alternative option for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. J Korean Surg Soc2012; 83(6): 381–387.
30.
GajjarAHRhodenDHKathuriaP, et al.Peritoneal dialysis catheters: laparoscopic versus traditional placement techniques and outcomes. Am J Surg2007; 194(6): 872–875.
31.
BateyCACraneJJJenkinsMA, et al.Mini-laparoscopy-assisted placement of Tenckhoff catheters: an improved technique to facilitate peritoneal dialysis. J Endourol2002; 16(9): 681–684.
32.
LiJRChenWMYangCK, et al.A novel method of laparoscopy-assisted peritoneal dialysis catheter placement. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2011; 21(2): 106–110.
33.
ÖğünçGTuncerMÖğünçD, et al.Laparoscopic omental fixation technique versus open surgical placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech2003; 17(11): 1749–1755.
34.
Al-HwieshA.Percutaneous versus laparoscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: simplicity and favorable outcome. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transplant2014; 25(6): 1194–1201.
35.
BorazanAComertMUcanBH, et al.The comparison in terms of early complications of a new technique and percutaneous method for the placement of CAPD catheters. Ren Fail2006; 28(1): 37–42.
36.
MellotteGJHoCAMorganSH, et al.Peritoneal dialysis catheters: a comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant1993; 8(7): 626–630.
37.
MedaniSHusseinWShantierM, et al.Comparison of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for first-time peritoneal dialysis catheter placement in the unbreached peritoneum. Perit Dial Int2014; 35(5): 576–585.
38.
KhositrangsikunKChujohnWKanokkantapongC, et al.Comparison of the Seldinger technique and surgical technique in Tenckhoff catheter insertion in CAPD patients: a single center experience. J Med Assoc Thai2011; 94(Suppl 4): S77–S80.
39.
ParkYSMinSIKimDK, et al.The outcomes of percutaneous versus open placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. World J Surg2014; 38(5): 1058–1064.
40.
SampathkumarKMahaldarARSoorajYS, et al.Percutaneous CAPD catheter insertion by a nephrologist versus surgical placement: a comparative study. Indian J Nephrol2008; 18(1): 5–8.
41.
OzenerCBihoracAAkogluE. Technical survival of CAPD catheters: comparison between percutaneous and conventional surgical placement techniques. Nephrol Dial Transplant2001; 16(9): 1893–1899.
42.
PerakisKEStylianouKGKyriazisJP, et al.Long-term complication rates and survival of peritoneal dialysis catheters: the role of percutaneous versus surgical placement. Semin Dial2010; 22(5): 569–575.
43.
EklundBGroopPHHalmeL, et al.Peritoneal dialysis access: a comparison of peritoneoscopic and surgical insertion techniques. Scand J Urol Nephrol1998; 32(6): 405–408.
44.
SoontrapornchaiPSimapatanapongT. Comparison of open and laparoscopic secure placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Surg Endosc2005; 19(1): 137–139.
45.
MedaniSShantierMHusseinW, et al.A comparative analysis of percutaneous and open surgical techniques for peritoneal catheter placement. Perit Dial Int2012; 32(6): 628–635.
46.
MaherEWolleyMJAbbasSA, et al.Fluoroscopic versus laparoscopic implantation of peritoneal dialysis catheters: a retrospective cohort study. J Vasc Interv Radiol2014; 25(6): 895–903.
47.
LiZLiYAliM, et al.Comparison of clinical efficacy between laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheterization and open peritoneal dialysis catheterization. Xinjiang J Tradit Chin Med2018; 1: 28–30.
48.
ZhouCZhaoXZhangJ, et al.Comparison of laparoscopic and open peritoneal dialysis catheterization. J Xinjiang Med Univ2014; 5: 598–602.
49.
TaoH. Comparative observation of laparoscopic catheterization and surgical incision catheterization in peritoneal dialysis. J Minim Invasive Med2017; 12(2): 295–296.
50.
JiangHLiYJiaYNX, et al.Clinical comparative study of two peritoneal dialysis surgery catheterization. Prog Mod Biomed2012; 12(30): 5878–5881.
51.
SunZJiangXTianQ, et al.The comparison of primary emergency peritoneal dialysis laparoscopic surgery and the traditional open abdominal catheter. J Heze Med Coll2017; 29(3): 26–28.
52.
XiePYuanLLiuF. The comparison of efficacy and safety between laparoscopic and conventional placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Hebei Med2014; 4: 562–566.
53.
LiMWuGLiuZ. Technical survival of laparoscopic vs conventional placement of peritoneal catheters in patients with end-stage renal disease. J Clin Nephrol2015; 7: 401–405.
54.
AoXZhouQNieW, et al.Clinical comparison of peritoneal dialysis catheter placement under laparoscope and by conventional surgical methods. Chin J Blood Purif2012; 11(10): 544–548.
55.
ZhangHXuPQiuX, et al.Comparisons of short-term and long-term complications between laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheterization and traditional open catheterization. Zhejiang J Traumatic Surg2017; 22: 364–365.
56.
RoueffSPagniezDMoranneO, et al.Simplified percutaneous placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters: comparison with surgical placement. Perit Dial Int2002; 22(2): 267–269.
57.
Abdel AalKAGuestSSMoawadS, et al.Outcomes of fluoroscopic and ultrasound-guided placement versus laparoscopic placement of peritoneal dialysis catheters. Clin Kidney J2018; 11(4): 549–554.
58.
DograPMHoodaAKShanmugrajG, et al.Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion Technique: A Comparative Study of Percutaneous versus Surgical Insertion. Indian J Nephrol2018; 28(4):291–297.
59.
McCormickBBBargmanJM. Noninfectious complications of peritoneal dialysis: implications for patient and technique survival. J Am Soc Nephrol2007; 18(12): 3023–3025.
60.
LiPKSzetoCCPirainoB, et al.ISPD peritonitis recommendations: 2016 update on prevention and treatment. Perit Dial Int2016; 36(5): 481–508.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
