Randomized controlled trials for comparison of laparoscopic versus conventional open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis

被引:21
作者
Sun, Mei-Lan [1 ]
Zhang, Yong [2 ]
Wang, Bo [3 ]
Ma, Te-An [4 ]
Jiang, Hong [4 ]
Hu, Shou-Liang [4 ]
Zhang, Piao [5 ]
Tuo, Yan-Hong [6 ]
机构
[1] Yangtze Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Blood Purificat Ctr, Jingzhou, Hubei, Peoples R China
[2] Jianli Peoples Hosp, Dept Nephrol, Jingzhou, Hubei, Peoples R China
[3] China Three Gorges Univ, Dept Ultrason Imaging, Affiliated Renhe Hosp, Yichang, Hubei, Peoples R China
[4] Yangtze Univ, Dept Nephrol, Affiliated Hosp 1, Jingzhou, Hubei, Peoples R China
[5] Nanjing Mil Command, Dept Nephrol, Nanjing Gen Hosp, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[6] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Cent Hosp Wuhan, Tongji Med Coll, Dept Nephrol, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China
关键词
Laparoscopic catheter placement; Conventional open catheter placement; Peritoneal dialysis; Complications; Meta-analysis; Mei-Lan sun and Yong Zhang are contributed equally to this work; SURGICAL PLACEMENT; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1186/s12882-020-01724-w
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background The application of laparoscopic catheterization technology in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients has recently increased. However, the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic versus conventional open PD catheter placement are still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the complications of catheterization in PD patients and to provide a reference for choosing a PD-catheter placement technique in the clinic. Methods We searched numerous databases, including Embase, PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane Library, for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Eight relevant studies (n = 646) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed a lower incidence of catheter migration (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.90, P: 0.03) and catheter removal (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.79, P: 0.008) but a higher incidence of bleeding (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.18 to 8.97, P: 0.02) with a laparoscopic approach than with a conventional approach. There was no significant difference in the incidence of omentum adhesion (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.05 to 2.10, P: 0.24), hernia (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.09 to 1.68, P: 0.20), leakage (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.26, P: 0.23), intestinal obstruction (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.91, P: 0.90) or perforation (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.06 to 15.42, P: 0.97). The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in early (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.33, P: 0.15), late (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.90, P: 0.76) or total (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.12, P: 0.13) peritonitis infections between the 2 groups, and there are no no significant difference in early (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.06 to 2.36, P: 0.30), late (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.33, P: 0.16) or total (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.02, P: 0.17) tunnel or exit-site infections between the 2 groups. Conclusion Laparoscopic catheterization and conventional open catheter placement in PD patients have unique advantages, but laparoscopic PD catheterization may be superior to conventional open catheter placement. However, this conclusion needs to be confirmed with further large-sample-size, multi-centre, high-quality RCTs.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Randomized controlled trials for comparison of laparoscopic versus conventional open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis
    Mei-Lan Sun
    Yong Zhang
    Bo Wang
    Te-An Ma
    Hong Jiang
    Shou-Liang Hu
    Piao Zhang
    Yan-Hong Tuo
    BMC Nephrology, 21
  • [2] Laparoscopic versus open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Xie, Haiying
    Zhang, Wei
    Cheng, Jun
    He, Qiang
    BMC NEPHROLOGY, 2012, 13
  • [3] The Survival and Complication Rates of Laparoscopic Versus Open Catheter Placement in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Meta-Analysis
    Chen, Yong
    Shao, Yeqing
    Xu, Jiayun
    SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES, 2015, 25 (05) : 440 - 443
  • [4] Laparoscopic versus open catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Haiying Xie
    Wei Zhang
    Jun Cheng
    Qiang He
    BMC Nephrology, 13
  • [5] Laparoscopic versus Conventional Open Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion in China: A Meta-Analysis
    Lu, Macheng
    Cheng, Cong
    Zhang, Ye
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2023, 20 (02) : 81 - 89
  • [6] Laparoscopic versus open surgery catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: A meta-analysis of outcomes
    Abdijalil, Guled
    Shuijuan, Shen
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY, 2022, 32 (05) : 406 - 413
  • [7] Laparoscopic versus open-surgery catheter placement in peritoneal dialysis patients: A meta-analysis of outcomes
    Abdijalil, Guled
    Shen Shuijuan
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY, 2022, 32 (01) : 8 - 15
  • [8] Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter placement
    Cox, Tiffany C.
    Blair, Laurel J.
    Huntington, Ciara R.
    Prasad, Tanushree
    Kercher, Kent W.
    Heniford, B. Todd
    Augenstein, Vedra A.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2016, 30 (03): : 899 - 905
  • [9] Laparoscopic versus Open Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion: A Meta-Analysis
    Hagen, Sander M.
    Lafranca, Jeffrey A.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    IJzermans, Jan N. M.
    Dor, Frank J. M. F.
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (02):
  • [10] RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING OPEN VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC PLACEMENT OF A PERITONEAL DIALYSIS CATHETER AND OUTCOMES: THE CAPD I TRIAL
    van Laanen, Jorinde H. H.
    Cornelis, Tom
    Mees, Barend M.
    Litjens, Elisabeth J.
    van Loon, Magda M.
    Tordoir, Jan H. M.
    Peppelenbosch, Arnoud G.
    PERITONEAL DIALYSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 38 (02): : 104 - 112