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
  • [21] Comparison of the complications of open surgery versus laparoscopic technique in insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheter
    Shahbandari, Morteza
    Amiran, Alireza
    JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2019, 24
  • [22] Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Hua, Jie
    Gong, Jian
    Xu, Bin
    Yang, Tingsong
    Song, Zhenshun
    JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2014, 18 (02) : 426 - 436
  • [23] Coiled Versus Straight Peritoneal Dialysis Catheters: A Randomized Controlled Trial and Meta-analysis
    Xie, Jingyuan
    Kiryluk, Krzysztof
    Ren, Hong
    Zhu, Ping
    Huang, Xiaomin
    Shen, Pingyan
    Xu, Tian
    Chen, Xiaonong
    Chen, Nan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2011, 58 (06) : 946 - 955
  • [24] Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion cost analysis
    Davis, William T.
    Dageforde, Leigh Anne
    Moore, Derek E.
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2014, 187 (01) : 182 - 188
  • [25] Laparoscopic versus traditional peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a meta analysis
    Qiao, Qing
    Zhou, Leting
    Hu, Kun
    Xu, Deyu
    Li, Lin
    Lu, Guoyuan
    RENAL FAILURE, 2016, 38 (05) : 838 - 848
  • [26] Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomy
    Garbutt, JM
    Soper, NJ
    Shannon, WD
    Botero, A
    Littenberg, B
    SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY & ENDOSCOPY, 1999, 9 (01) : 17 - 26
  • [27] Comparison of different peritoneal dialysis catheters on complication and catheter survival: A network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Zhao, Lijuan
    Yu, Zixian
    Li, Xiayin
    Zhao, Jin
    Qin, Yunlong
    Zhou, Meilan
    Bai, Ming
    Xu, Guoshuang
    Sun, Shiren
    PERITONEAL DIALYSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2025, 45 (01): : 35 - 43
  • [28] Surgical versus percutaneous catheter placement for peritoneal dialysis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
    Stepan M. Esagian
    Georgios A. Sideris
    Muath Bishawi
    Ioannis A. Ziogas
    Ruediger W. Lehrich
    John P. Middleton
    Paul V. Suhocki
    Theodore N. Pappas
    Konstantinos P. Economopoulos
    Journal of Nephrology, 2021, 34 : 1681 - 1696
  • [29] Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Reis, Pedro C. A.
    Bittar, Vinicius
    Almiron, Giulia
    Schramm, Ana Julia
    Oliveira, Joao Pedro
    Cagnacci, Renato
    Camandaroba, Marcos P. G.
    JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL CANCER, 2024, 55 (03) : 1058 - 1068
  • [30] Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Zhang, Feng-Wa
    Zhou, Zhao-Yu
    Wang, Hai-Lin
    Zhang, Jv-Xia
    Di, Bao-Shan
    Huang, Wen-Hui
    Yang, Ke-Hu
    ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2014, 15 (22) : 9985 - 9996