Peritoneal catheter-related complications: a comparison between hemodialysis and intermittent peritoneal dialysis in the break-in period.

Abstract We prospectively monitored the clinical outcome of 89 curled, double-cuff peritoneal catheters (PC) implanted by surgeons over one year. Thirty-six cases (40%) were supported with hemodialysis (HD) (group A) and 53 cases (60%) were supported with weekly intermittent peritoneal dialysis (IPD) (small exchange volume with a cycler) (group B) for four weeks before commencing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). PC-related complications between the two groups were compared. Ten cases failed to complete the six-month observation period (8 died, 1 received kidney transplant, and 1 defaulted follow-up),Total experience accumulated was 494 patient-months (195 patient-months in group A, 299 patient-months in group B). The incidence of pericatheter leakage (group A vs group B) was significantly higher in group B (0% vs 13%, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of other PC-related complications, removal of PC, and mortality rate in the two groups. The incidence of pericatheter leakage was significantly higher in diabetic patients (71% vs 22%, p < 0.05), and group B patients with leakage had a higher incidence of external cuff erosion 57% vs 7%, p < 0.005) and delay in CAPD training (71% vs 7%, p < 0.005). We conclude that both HD and IPD are equally safe renal replacement therapies in the break-in period, while patients supported with IPD had a higher incidence of pericatheter leakage, which was associated with other catheter-related morbidities including external cuff erosion and delay in CAPD training.